Update shipping

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden of disclosure. It only states the tool updates shipping information and requires basketId, but it does not reveal side effects, idempotency, permissions, or what happens to existing shipping data. This is minimal and leaves significant behavioral uncertainty.

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, concise sentence that front-loads the main action. There is no verbosity or redundant words, though it could have been structured to include more essential details without becoming bloated.

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?

The tool is a mutation with 3 required parameters, including a nested array, and has no output schema or annotations. The description is too sparse to provide complete context for correct invocation; it lacks usage scenarios, parameter breakdown, and response expectations, making it inadequate for an agent to use confidently.

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%, yet the description adds no parameter meanings. It repeats that basketId is required (already in schema) and does not explain the shipping_list array structure, its items, or the relationship between order_number and basket_id. This fails to compensate for the lack of schema descriptions.

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 clearly states the action ('Update shipping') and the subject ('配送情報更新' = shipping information update), and specifies the core function of registering carrier and tracking number. However, it does not distinguish itself from the sibling tool rms_update_shipping_async, so it lacks explicit differentiation.

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?

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool vs alternatives like rms_update_shipping_async or other order update tools. The only additional hint, 'basketIdが必要' (basketId required), is already declared in the input schema, so it adds no practical usage context.

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