Generate BlueDart Waybill

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

The description adds substantial context beyond annotations: it states the API call is POST, returns AWB number and PDF, and specifies preconditions. Annotations indicate destructiveHint=true and readOnlyHint=false, which aligns with creating a record. No contradictions. A minor gap is lack of mention on rate limits or idempotency, but it's well-covered.

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 7 sentences, each serving a purpose: first sentence defines the action, second mentions the API and returns, third and fourth give preconditions, fifth provides unit info. Front-loaded and efficient with no fluff.

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?

Given the complexity (nested objects, no output schema), the description covers the main action, preconditions, return values, and potential errors. It lacks details on exact response structure or all error types, but it is sufficient for correct usage.

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?

The input schema has high description coverage (many fields have descriptions). The description adds value by specifying units (kilograms, centimetres) and critical preconditions like OriginArea matching. This goes beyond the schema descriptions, justifying a score above baseline 3.

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 tool creates a single BlueDart Air Waybill for a shipment, specifying the verb 'Create' and resource 'BlueDart Air Waybill'. It distinguishes from siblings like cancel_waybill or import_waybill, and mentions the API endpoint and return values.

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?

Explicit preconditions are listed: OriginArea must match shipper pincode region, and CreditReferenceNo must be unique. These serve as when-to-use and when-not-to-use guidelines, and mention specific error messages. The description also implies this tool is for generating AWB while siblings handle other operations.

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