Select Delivery Slot

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

Annotations already signal a destructive, non-read-only, idempotent, open-world operation. The description adds context by specifying that the operation overwrites the delivery selection and that matching is based on visible option text rather than identifiers. This aligns with destructiveHint=true and provides useful behavioral detail beyond the annotations.

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?

A single, direct sentence with no filler. The action, target, and matching strategy are all front-loaded, making it easy for an agent to parse quickly.

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 a simple one-parameter tool, strong annotations, and an output schema, the description covers the essential behavior. The reference to list_delivery_slots in the parameter description fills the remaining gap about where the match text comes from. It could go a step further by stating exact-match requirements, but this is not a major omission.

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 100%, so the baseline is solid. The description adds meaning by clarifying that the 'match' parameter corresponds to visible option text, not just any string. This complements the schema's 'Text from list_delivery_slots' and gives the agent a clearer model of how the parameter is used.

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 states a specific action ('overwrite'), a specific target ('checkout delivery selection'), and the mechanism ('matching visible option text'). This clearly distinguishes it from the read-oriented sibling list_delivery_slots and other checkout tools.

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 clearly indicates when to use the tool: when the checkout delivery selection needs to be overwritten. It also implicitly points to list_delivery_slots as the source of the match text via the parameter description, which provides practical guidance. However, it does not explicitly state when not to use it or name alternatives.

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