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

With no annotations, the description does real work: it discloses the seller-only perspective, that each row carries the buyer brief and any revision_note, that a publish prerequisite applies, and that the default filter is a composite (pending + revision) rather than a single status. It omits pagination and result ordering, which keeps it off 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?

A single sentence, front-loaded with the 'As a seller' scoping that matters most, with no filler. The parentheticals make it dense but every clause carries information an agent needs.

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 one-optional-parameter read tool with no output schema and no annotations, the description covers purpose, default behavior, returned fields, and a prerequisite. Only pagination/volume expectations and the exact meaning of 'requires publish' are 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 0%, so the description must carry the enum semantics, and it does: it defines the non-obvious 'todo' value as a union of pending and revision and enumerates the remaining states. The parenthetical '(requires publish)' is left ambiguous and is the main gap.

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 service orders to fulfil') and scopes it to the seller role, which separates it from buyer-side tools like my_purchases and from single-order tools like service_status or get_delivery. It does not name a sibling explicitly, so it stops short of the top band.

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?

Usage is implied by the seller framing and the default filter ('Default todo = pending + revision'), so an agent can infer when to call it with no arguments. However, it never states when to use this versus service_status or get_delivery, and gives no explicit exclusions.

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