clm_smart_shipment_command_save_shipment_wizard_timeslots

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

Annotations already include idempotentHint=true and destructiveHint=false, and the description adds meaningful behavioral detail: zone resolution including waiting area, and applying the schedule either to the shipment or to its smart-draft depending on shipment validity. This goes beyond the structured annotations without contradicting them.

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 compact: two sentences that front-load the core purpose and then add important conditional behavior. It is slightly dense with domain jargon, but every sentence adds value and there is no padding.

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 wizard-step context, the annotation safety profile, and the presence of an output schema, the description is sufficiently complete for an agent to select and call this tool correctly. The only minor gap is less explicit documentation of the exact time-slot-related parameters, but this is partially covered by the schema itself.

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%, so the description carries the burden of explaining parameters. It maps well to most parameters: 'unloading zone' to Zone, 'delivery time slots' to Slots, 'bookable/non-bookable equipment' to the two equipment arrays, and 'schedule' to the schedule start/end fields. It does not explicitly describe BookingDate or NumberOfSlot, but the overall semantics are substantially clarified.

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 a specific verb ('Saves'), a precise resource ('step 2 of the Smart Shipment wizard'), and the exact data involved: unloading zone, delivery time slots, and bookable/non-bookable equipment. This differentiates it from sibling wizard-step tools such as booking_dates, materials, and other_info.

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 gives clear context about when this is used ('step 2 of the Smart Shipment wizard') and explains the conditional behavior for direct shipments vs smart-drafts. It does not explicitly name alternatives or exclusions, but the step and domain context make the intended usage clear.

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