Create return

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

The annotations already declare this is a non-destructive, non-idempotent, open-world write. The description reinforces the two-phase workflow but adds little about behavior beyond what the schema states (default to all shipped items). It omits any warning that repeated calls are not idempotent, leaving a behavioral gap.

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?

Four short sentences, each earning its place, with the core action front-loaded and the routing hints following. No filler.

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 5-parameter, no-output-schema tool, the description covers the action, the default scope, and the two follow-up tools well. It leaves out the response shape and any auth/permission requirements, but nothing essential to invoking it correctly is missing.

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 high (80%), so the baseline is 3, but the description adds real value by telling the agent that 'reason_id' values come from get_store_info and that 'items' defaults to every shipped item, tying parameters to their source of truth.

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 action and resource ('Requests a return of order items') and clarifies direction ('the customer is sending them back'). It explicitly distinguishes itself from siblings receive_return and refund_payment, so an agent can route without opening schemas.

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 explicit when-to-use and when-to-use-something-else rules: call receive_return when the parcel arrives, refund separately via refund_payment. It also notes that omitting 'items' returns every shipped item, so the agent knows the default scope.

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