process_order

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries full burden. It discloses the atomic write operation, inventory decrement side effect, and required permission (order:write). It does not detail failure behavior or idempotency, but for a mutation tool, this is substantive.

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 sentence plus a permission note, with no extraneous words. It is front-loaded with the main purpose and concise.

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 is non-trivial with four required parameters, atomic inventory decrement, and an output schema (not shown). The description omits details on idempotency key usage, return value, and exact inventory behavior. More context is needed for a complete understanding.

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% and the description does not mention any of the four required parameters (customer_id, sku, quantity, idempotency_key). The description fails to add any meaning beyond the schema, which is insufficient for a tool with no parameter descriptions in the schema.

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?

Description clearly states the tool creates an order atomically and decrements inventory, with a specific verb and resource. It distinguishes itself from siblings like create_support_ticket (different resource) and update_inventory (different action).

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 mentions a required permission (order:write) but provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives, such as when to use update_inventory separately or create_support_ticket. There is no context about exclusions or prerequisites beyond the permission.

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