apply_store_product_order

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden for behavioral disclosure. It implies a mutation (reordering) but does not detail side effects, such as whether the original order is overwritten, if the operation is reversible, or any required permissions.

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, focused sentence that conveys the tool's action and rationale without any extraneous words. It is well-structured and front-loaded.

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 zero parameters and no output schema, the description is somewhat adequate but lacks details on behavioral traits (e.g., mutation, idempotency) that an agent might need to safely invoke it. It does not mention if the tool operates on the current shopping note or requires a specific context.

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 no parameters, so the description does not need to explain parameters. As per guidelines, 0 parameters yields a baseline of 4. The description adds context about the tool's purpose, which is sufficient.

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 'Reorder shopping note lines' and the purpose 'to match the store's aisle layout for efficient in-store shopping'. It specifies the verb and resource, but does not explicitly differentiate from the sibling tool 'reorder_shopping_note_lines', which may have a similar function.

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 provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like 'reorder_shopping_note_lines' or 'sort_product_list'. There are no usage conditions, prerequisites, or exclusions stated.

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