consignment_dealers

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It states 'Read-only' and explains that the shippable/block_reason values reflect the same enforcement gate as ship_consignment_out, which is useful behavioral context beyond the schema. It could add more detail about response shape or data freshness, but the core safety and consistency semantics are covered.

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?

Three sentences deliver all the essential information: what is returned, the key fields, the relation to the enforcement gate, when to use it, and read-only status. No filler or redundancy.

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?

With no output schema and no annotations, the description still provides the key returned fields, the tool's purpose, and its usage timing. An agent has enough information to invoke the tool correctly and interpret its result.

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 tool has zero parameters, so there is no parameter semantics to add. The description's opening 'Every FFL-dealer Customer' reinforces that no filtering is involved. A baseline of 4 is appropriate for a no-parameter tool.

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 states precisely what the tool returns: every FFL-dealer customer's consignment shippability, including FFL number, eZ-Check status, expiry, and shippable/block_reason. It also distinguishes this tool from related consignment operations by tying it to the same gate ship_consignment_out enforces.

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 says 'Use before building a consignment,' giving the agent a clear trigger for when to call this tool. It does not explicitly discuss alternatives or when not to use it, but the contextual placement and relationship to ship_consignment_out make the intended use clear.

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