create_order

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

There are no annotations, so the description carries the full burden. It thoroughly discloses the API endpoint (POST /v1/orders), side effects (inventory deduction, customer notification, immediate effect), and return structure. It also warns that the order becomes active immediately, emphasizing the need to verify data before execution.

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 well-structured with labeled sections (用途, API, 回傳結構, 副作用) and bullet points. It front-loads the purpose and each section provides non-redundant, necessary information, making the length justified and easily scannable.

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?

Despite lacking annotations and output schema, the description provides a complete picture: purpose, API endpoint, return structure, side effects, and parameter requirements. For a single-parameter write tool, this covers all critical aspects needed for correct invocation.

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?

The schema already describes order_data as requiring complete order data, and the description reinforces this by stating it must contain all required fields per the Shopline API spec. Since there is only one parameter with 100% schema coverage, the description adds minimal additional meaning but does not need to compensate.

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 immediately states '[WRITE] 建立新訂單' (create new order), clearly defining the action and resource. It further specifies practical use cases such as phone orders, customer service order supplements, and offline order transfers, which distinguishes it from order modification or query tools like update_order or get_order_detail.

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 explicitly lists when to use the tool (phone orders, CS order supplements, offline transfers) and states the prerequisite that order_data must contain complete fields required by the Shopline API. However, it does not mention when not to use it or explicitly name alternative tools such as update_order, making it clear but not exhaustive.

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