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

With no annotations, the description carries full burden but only states the action without disclosing prerequisites such as authentication (siblings include login_manabuy), potential side effects, or error conditions. The verb 'Get' implies read-only, but no explicit behavioral context is provided.

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 a single sentence with no filler, front-loading the verb and resource. It is appropriately compact for a simple one-parameter operation.

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?

Given the simple parameter schema and lack of output schema, the description offers the bare minimum: it names the operation and parameter. However, it doesn't cover authentication requirements or return value expectations, leaving the agent under-informed for a production context.

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?

The schema already provides a description for orderNo ('ManaBuy order number'), achieving 100% coverage. The description's 'by order number' simply restates this, adding no additional semantic value beyond what the schema contains.

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 uses a specific verb 'Get' with resource 'ManaBuy order detail' and identifies the key identifier 'by order number'. This distinguishes it from sibling tools like get_order_status which focuses on status only.

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 does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives like get_order_status or get_product_detail. The usage is implied from the name but not reinforced with guidance about which order-related operation to choose.

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