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 implies a read operation but doesn't explicitly state it's read-only or safe. It also doesn't disclose pagination behavior, default limits, or that it fetches from the live store (though it mentions 'connected Shopify store'). For a read tool with no annotations, more explicit safety and behavior notes would be helpful.

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 two sentences long plus a short routing note. It's front-loaded with the core purpose, then adds the optional query detail and usage guidance. No wasted words; every sentence earns its place.

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 list tool with no output schema, the description covers the return fields (order name/number, total, statuses, created date), which is helpful. It doesn't mention pagination or sorting behavior, but for a simple list with a limit param, this is adequate. The query parameter examples add context. Slightly incomplete on behavior details, but overall sufficient.

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 the schema already defines limit, query, and companyId. The description adds meaning to the query parameter with examples ('financial_status:paid' or 'created_at:>2026-08-01'), which is valuable, but doesn't add much beyond that. For companyId, the schema already says it's required and company-scoped, and the description doesn't elaborate further. Baseline 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 clearly states the tool lists recent orders from the Shopify store with specific fields (order name/number, total, financial+fulfillment status, created date). It distinguishes itself from sibling tools like get_shopify_order (singular) and list_shopify_products by explicitly focusing on orders with order statuses. The routing note reinforces the purpose.

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 says to use it for recent sales and their state, and mentions optional query filters. It provides context for when to use (recent sales overview) but does not explicitly state when not to use it or name alternatives like get_shopify_order for a single order. The routing section clarifies use case slightly more.

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