create_demand

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It only states the high-level action without mentioning side effects (e.g., stock impact, document status), permissions, reversibility, or return behavior, which is a significant gap for a create 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?

The description is extremely concise at two short sentences, front-loading the core purpose without any fluff. Every word adds value.

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?

The tool has a nested positions array and no output schema. The description covers the primary purpose but does not explain what the created document looks like or any prerequisites. Given the complexity, it is minimally adequate but leaves gaps about the result and usage constraints.

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 100%, so parameters are already documented. The description adds minimal context about the warehouse link and customer order purpose, but does not significantly enhance parameter understanding beyond what the schema provides.

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 verb ('Create'), the resource ('shipment (demand)'), and the purpose ('to fulfill a customer order'). It distinguishes from sibling tools like create_customer_order and create_move by specifying the shipment/demand context and the warehouse linkage.

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 phrase 'to fulfill a customer order' provides clear context for when to use this tool, implying shipment against a sales order. However, it does not explicitly name alternatives or state when not to use it, so it lacks explicit exclusions.

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