Skip to main content
Glama

List orders

list_orders
Read-onlyIdempotent

Store orders, open ones first.

Tool call template

This tool declares no required parameters. Add optional parameters from the input schema as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {},
    "name": "list_orders"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
limitNoHow many to return, newest first where there's an order (default 25).
fieldsNoWhich fields to return. Leave out for the usual ones: order_id, order_name, status, created_at, customer_name, line_items.
project_idNoWorkspace to work in (from list_projects). Leave out for the default one.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observed

TDQS

C2.4/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true and destructiveHint=false, so the safety profile is covered. The description's one contribution is the ordering rule ("open ones first"), which complements the schema's "newest first" note and is genuinely new information. It says nothing about pagination or result shape, but with full annotation coverage a 3 is appropriate.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness3/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

Five words, zero waste, but the terseness crosses into under-specification rather than efficiency. There is no structure to speak of beyond a comma splice.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness2/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

The tool is simple and the schema is self-documenting, but with no output schema the description could still state what comes back and how it differs from shopify_list_orders and other list_* siblings. Those gaps are exactly the ones an agent needs filled.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters3/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema description coverage is 100% – limit, fields and project_id are all documented in-schema, including defaults and cross-references (list_projects). The description adds no parameter meaning whatsoever, so the baseline 3 applies.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose2/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

"Store orders, open ones first" is essentially a noun phrase echoing the tool name rather than a verb+resource statement. It hints at the resource (orders) and an ordering rule, but an agent cannot tell what the tool actually does from it, nor distinguish it from shopify_list_orders.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines2/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

There is no when-to-use guidance and no mention of the obvious alternative, shopify_list_orders, which sits in the same sibling set. The agent is left to infer selection criteria from the tool name alone.

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

Try in Browser

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.