update_order

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

With no annotations, the description must carry the transparency burden. It reveals that it's a partial update ('only provided fields are changed'), but lacks details on permissions, side effects (e.g., does updating email trigger a customer update?), or state restrictions. This is insufficient for a mutation tool.

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 consists of two short, direct sentences that are front-loaded with the key information. Every sentence serves a purpose, making it concise and well-structured.

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?

While the description covers the basic action and partial update behavior, it omits important context such as error conditions (e.g., order not found), idempotency, and whether certain parameters require specific permissions. For a tool with 4 parameters and no output schema, this is a moderate gap.

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 input schema already provides full descriptions for all 4 parameters (100% coverage). The description's mention of 'notes or tags' is redundant with the schema and adds no new semantic information. Therefore, the description does not enhance parameter understanding.

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 action 'update' and the resource 'existing order', distinguishing it from sibling tools like cancel_order. It also specifies typical use cases (notes/tags) and the behavior of partial update, making the purpose very clear.

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 provides implicit usage by stating 'Typically used to add/edit notes or tags' and 'Only provided fields are changed', but it does not explicitly compare to alternatives or state when not to use it. There is no guidance about prerequisites or when to use other order update tools.

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