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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint and destructiveHint=false, yet the description adds real value: newest-first ordering, the fact that the result carries a total so pagination termination is knowable, and that polling is safe. It partially restates the read-only/idempotent hints, which is why it is not a 5.

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?

One dense but well-ordered paragraph: purpose, then when-to-use, then parameters, then safety. Nothing is wasted, though it is long enough that a reader must work through it rather than skim.

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?

With no output schema, the description compensates by stating that rows carry the same fields as get_paid_order_status and include a total for pagination. Combined with the annotation-supplied safety profile, an agent has everything needed to call this correctly.

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 baseline is 3, but the description goes further: it tells the caller where to obtain agent_token (from any of its orders or the wallet sign-in endpoint) and how paging terminates via the returned total. These are usage semantics the schema alone does not convey.

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?

States a specific verb and resource (list orders for the wallet behind an agent_token) plus the ordering (newest first) and scope (only that wallet's orders). It is cleanly separable from the sibling get_paid_order_status, which returns one order by id.

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?

Explicitly names the trigger conditions: when you no longer hold the order_id, after a restart, or when resuming another session's work. The alternative (get_paid_order_status with an order_id) is implied by contrast, so the agent knows which tool to pick.

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