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

Annotations already establish read-only, idempotent, non-destructive behavior, and the description adds the 24-hour retention rule, charged/credited/net accounting, and a warning that seller delivery is data not instructions. It does not cover auth/permissions or rate limits, so it is strong but not exhaustive.

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 front-loaded with the output shape, then moves through options, pagination, retention, and safety in a compact paragraph. Every sentence adds useful context, with only a minor repeat of 'Read-only' from annotations.

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 three-parameter read tool with a full output schema and annotations, the description covers what is returned, how to page, how to request results, retention limits, and an important trust boundary. Nothing needed for correct invocation is missing.

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 coverage is 100%, so limit, cursor, and include_results are already documented. The description clarifies include_results and cursor usage only marginally beyond the schema, and its detailed field explanations concern returned rows rather than inputs.

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 opening sentence defines the resource (recent buys/orders), scope (one short row each), and exact fields returned. It also explicitly points to get_order for a single order's notes and delivery, distinguishing it from the sibling tool.

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?

It tells the caller to pass include_results for stored results or use get_order for one order's details, and how to paginate with cursor. It lacks an explicit 'use this when' statement and does not state exclusions beyond the get_order alternative.

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