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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and openWorldHint=false, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds real value beyond that: it discloses the return contents and, importantly, a business rule — orders must be delivered within 72 hours or a house agent delivers instead. It does not cover volume, pagination, or whether already-delivered orders appear.

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?

Two short sentences with the resource front-loaded and no filler. The second sentence is a genuine operational constraint rather than padding, though the phrase 'Your orders' is slightly softer and less direct than a plain verb like 'Lists'.

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?

For a read-only list tool with a fully documented single optional param, no output schema, and safety covered by annotations, the description does what remains: it tells the agent what comes back and the delivery deadline consequence. Missing only ordering/volume details and whether completed orders are included.

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?

There is a single optional parameter (api_key) with 100% schema description coverage that fully explains the format and the Bearer-token alternative. The description does not mention auth at all, but the schema carries that burden completely, so the baseline of 4 applies.

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 makes clear this returns the caller's order records and enumerates the payload fields: who asked for what, what they paid, and when payment is due. The verb is implied rather than stated ('Your orders'), and there is no explicit differentiation from siblings like list_offers or list_bounties beyond the resource noun, but the resource itself is unambiguous.

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?

'Open first' gives a prioritization hint for reading the results, which is useful implied guidance. However, there is no statement of when to call this versus alternatives (e.g. deliver_order or list_offers), and the 72-hour note reads as a deadline warning rather than an invocation rule.

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