confirm_order

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

Annotations already indicate destructiveHint=true and readOnlyHint=false. The description adds that it 'potentially charge a Real order', 'fail-closed', and 'never retried', providing behavioral details beyond annotations without 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 very concise: one introductory sentence followed by a bullet-like list of requirements. It is front-loaded with the core action and contains no redundant words.

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 critical nature of this tool (charging), the description covers prerequisites and behavioral traits well. It does not explain the output, but an output schema exists. It could benefit from mentioning potential error states, but overall it is sufficiently complete.

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% (no descriptions for parameters). The description does not explicitly explain confirmed_total or confirmation_token. While it mentions 'exact total' and 'fresh preview', it does not map these to parameters, leaving a gap for an agent to understand parameter semantics without schema help.

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 explicitly states 'Submit and potentially charge a REAL order', providing a specific verb (submit) and resource (order). It distinguishes from sibling tool checkout_preview by emphasizing it is the real submission step.

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 lists explicit prerequisites: fresh preview, exact total, unchanged cart fingerprint/version, selected delivery interval, payment method, and configured maximum total. It also notes 'disabled by default' and 'never retried', giving clear guidance on when and how to use.

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