taobao_track_orders

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

Annotations provide readOnlyHint and idempotentHint. The description adds critical behavioral details: caching, daily refresh limit, that it only works on active orders, and the force parameter to bypass cache mid-day. No contradiction.

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 reasonably concise and front-loaded with the core purpose. It includes important details like example and caching behavior, though it could be slightly trimmed without losing meaning.

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 output schema exists, the description adequately covers behavior (caching, active-only, daily limit) and usage context. It could mention the exact meaning of 'max' but is otherwise complete for a tool with few parameters.

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 coverage is 0%, so the description must compensate. It mentions 'only_active', 'max', and 'force' with some context (force for mid-day refresh, example shows only_active and max). However, it does not explain what 'max' limits (e.g., number of orders) precisely, leaving some ambiguity.

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 it tracks orders ('Track 已买到的宝贝') per order, providing status, carrier, tracking number, pickup OTP, and station. It is distinct from sibling tools like search, messages, or cart operations.

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 description explains this is for forwarding logistics info to a China agent, runs once per day with caching, and only handles active orders. It gives an example and notes when to force refresh, but does not explicitly exclude cases like non-active orders or alternatives.

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