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

Annotations already declare readOnly, idempotent, and non-destructive, so safety is covered. The description adds context annotations do not carry: results are scoped to 'this account' and sorted newest-first, which tells the agent what to expect from the result set.

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?

Two short sentences, the default ordering is front-loaded, and the filter guidance follows immediately. No sentence is wasted.

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 an output schema present, return formatting is covered, and annotations cover the safety profile. For a one-optional-param list tool this is nearly complete; the only omission is any mention of result limits or pagination behavior.

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% and already documents quote_id's format (qt_...), so the baseline is 3. The description goes beyond that by explaining the intent behind the filter (verifying a checkout link was paid), which is meaning the schema does not supply.

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 names the resource ('Orders for this account') and a default ordering ('newest first'), which is enough to distinguish it from the singular get_order sibling. It stops short of using an explicit listing verb, but the resource+scope pairing is clear.

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 gives one concrete use case ('filter by quote_id to check whether a checkout link was paid'), which implies when to reach for the filter. It never states when not to use this tool or points to alternatives like get_order for a single order, leaving routing to inference.

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