Update sender (before shipping)

Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It only says 'update sender information' without mentioning mutations, permission requirements, idempotency, validation, or what happens if the order is already shipped. This is insufficient for a write operation.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

The description is a single compact phrase that communicates the core purpose and timing in one line. It is front-loaded and has no unnecessary filler, though it risks being too terse.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

With a nested object parameter, no output schema, and no annotations, a one-line description is not enough. It lacks field-level details for 'sender', usage semantics, and interaction with shipping state, making it incomplete for correct invocation.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema description coverage is 0%, and the description provides no explanation of the 'sender' nested object structure or the format of 'order_number'. The parameter names give some hint, but the description adds no value beyond the names.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description states the action (update sender information) and the timing scope (before shipping), which clearly distinguishes it from the sibling tool rms_update_sender_after_shipping. The title reinforces both the resource and the pre-shipment constraint.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

The '(before shipping)' qualifier implies this tool should be used prior to shipment, but the description does not explicitly state when to use it instead of rms_update_sender_after_shipping or rms_update_delivery. No alternatives or exclusions are named.

Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.