update_draft_order

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

With no annotations, the description carries the burden. It states that only provided fields are changed, which is a key behavioral trait. However, it does not mention idempotency, permissions, error conditions, or return value. This is adequate but not thorough.

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 extremely concise with two sentences. It front-loads the action and key behavior without any unnecessary words. 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?

Given the tool's simplicity (5 parameters, no output schema, no annotations), the description is somewhat complete. It covers the core behavior but omits what the tool returns, prerequisites (e.g., draft order must exist), and error scenarios. With no output schema, more detail would be helpful.

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 description coverage is 100%, so baseline is 3. The description adds value by stating the partial update semantics ('Only provided fields are changed'), clarifying that optional parameters are merged rather than replaced. This goes beyond 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?

The description clearly states the verb 'Update' and the resource 'draft order', and specifies that only provided fields are changed. This distinguishes it from sibling tools like create_draft_order, delete_draft_order, etc.

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 implies when to use it (to modify an existing draft order) and the partial update behavior. It does not explicitly mention alternatives, but the sibling tool names provide enough context. A more explicit comparison could improve it.

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