update_pickup_store

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden and does so excellently. It discloses the [WRITE] nature, immediate effect, customer-facing visibility, and irreversibility (though overwrite is possible). This gives the agent important risk awareness beyond the schema.

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 clear sections for purpose, API mapping, return structure, and side effects. Every section earns its place, and the [WRITE] prefix plus front-loaded purpose make it scannable for an agent.

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?

This is a mutation tool with no output schema and a nested object parameter. The description compensates fully by including the API endpoint, expected return dict structure, side effects, and an example payload. Given the complexity, the description is complete enough 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?

Schema coverage is 100%, so the baseline is 3. The description adds genuine value by providing a concrete JSON example for pickup_store_data and explaining the role of delivery_option_id. This goes beyond mere schema repetition and helps the agent construct inputs correctly.

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 uses a specific verb ('修改'/'更新') and a concrete resource (自取門市 under a delivery option), clearly distinguishing it from siblings like get_delivery_option_detail or update_order_delivery. It also lists the kinds of fields that can be updated, making the purpose immediately understandable.

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 states when this tool is appropriate ('適合門市資訊異動時同步更新 Shopline 的自取門市設定'), giving clear usage context. However, it does not explicitly mention when not to use it or name alternative tools, so it stops short of full exclusion guidance.

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