update_fulfillment_tracking

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full transparency burden. It explicitly discloses the side effect of modifying tracking_company, tracking_number, or tracking_url. However, it does not mention other side effects like customer notifications (notify_customer) or partial-update behavior.

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 concise with two short sentences, front-loading the action and immediately clarifying the side effect. No unnecessary words or redundancy.

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 simple, the schema covers all parameters, and the description covers purpose and side effects. It could mention that only provided fields are updated or that notify_customer triggers a customer email, but these are already in the schema, making the description largely complete.

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 100%, so the baseline is 3. The description adds minimal meaning beyond the schema, only naming the tracking fields but not elaborating on fulfillment_id or notify_customer beyond their existing 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 uses a specific verb ('Update') and resource ('tracking information for an existing fulfillment'), and explicitly lists the fields modified (tracking_company, tracking_number, tracking_url), clearly distinguishing it from sibling tools like get_fulfillment or create_fulfillment.

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?

Clear context is provided: this tool updates an existing fulfillment's tracking info. However, there are no explicit alternatives or when-not-to-use statements, though the purpose is distinct enough to infer appropriate usage.

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