Confirm order

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It mentions the status precondition and 'No request body is required,' but it does not disclose the resulting order status changes, potential errors, or idempotency. The 'No request body' statement is ambiguous given the schema requires an id, potentially misleading the agent.

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 three sentences long, with the main action in the first sentence and no filler. It is front-loaded and every sentence contributes useful information.

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?

The tool is simple with one parameter and no output schema, so the description covers the core action. However, the ambiguity between 'No request body is required' and the required 'id' in the schema leaves the agent uncertain about how to pass the parameter, and the description does not clarify the response or side effects of confirming an order.

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 description coverage is 100% for the single 'id' parameter, so the schema already documents its meaning as 'Order ID (UUID).' The description adds no additional semantic value about the parameter, so the baseline score of 3 is appropriate.

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 starts with 'Confirm an order,' which clearly identifies the verb and resource. It distinguishes from sibling tools like cancel_order and complete_order_delivery by specifying the confirm action and adding the required WAIT_FOR_CONFIRMATION status.

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 an explicit precondition: 'The order must be in the WAIT_FOR_CONFIRMATION status.' This implies when to use the tool. It does not explicitly mention alternatives or when-not to use it, so it stops short of a 5.

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