prom_seller_set_order_status

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

No annotations are supplied, so the description carries the full burden. It usefully discloses the write-gate flag, but omits the mutating semantics an agent needs: valid status values, irreversibility of the change, and whether cancellation_text/cancellation_reason become mandatory for certain statuses. That is a meaningful gap for a write operation.

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?

Two short sentences with zero filler; the action is front-loaded and the constraint follows immediately. Nothing needs to be cut.

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?

For a mutation tool with no annotations, no output schema and 0% parameter documentation, the description covers only the write gate. It leaves the agent guessing about permissible status values and the cancellation fields, so it is not sufficient on its own to call the tool correctly.

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% across four parameters. The description implies 'ids' accepts multiple orders and that 'status' is the target value, but says nothing about valid status values (the schema allows string or integer) or the purpose/conditions of cancellation_text and cancellation_reason.

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?

States a specific verb ('Change status') and resource ('seller orders'), with the one-or-many scope made explicit. It is clearly separable from read siblings like prom_seller_list_orders and prom_seller_get_order, though it does not explicitly name the nearest alternative prom_seller_set_message_status.

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?

Gives a hard availability condition ('Disabled unless PROM_ALLOW_WRITES=true'), which is useful gating context. However it never says when to prefer this tool over alternatives, nor what preconditions the target orders must satisfy for a status change to be valid.

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