Mark as shipped

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

Annotations already declare the mutation profile (readOnlyHint=false, destructiveHint=false, idempotentHint=false, openWorldHint=true). The description adds the non-obvious fallback behavior when fulfillment_id is omitted, which is genuine extra context, but it says nothing about notify_customer's effect, validation failures, or what happens when multiple unshipped fulfillments exist.

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?

Two short sentences with no filler; the primary purpose is front-loaded and the fallback rule follows immediately. Every sentence earns its place.

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 mutation tool with 20% schema coverage and no output schema, the description covers purpose and one default rule but omits the role of the other three optional parameters and any error/precondition behavior. It is adequate to identify the tool but thin for calling it correctly.

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 only 20% and 5 parameters exist, so the description must compensate and largely does not. Only fulfillment_id gets any explanation; tracking_number, tracking_url, and notify_customer (default true) are left entirely undocumented, so the agent must guess whether they are required or what they control.

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 verb and resource ('Marks a fulfillment as shipped') plus the side effect (attaches a tracking number), which is enough to distinguish it from siblings like create_fulfillment and complete_order. It stops short of explicitly naming those siblings, so it falls short of a 5.

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 adds one useful conditional rule ('Without fulfillment_id it uses the only unshipped fulfillment'), which is closer to behavioral context than usage guidance. It never says when to prefer this over create_fulfillment or complete_order, nor any prerequisite for shipping, so usage is only implied.

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