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

Annotations already declare readOnly/destructive/openWorld, so the safety profile is covered; the description adds meaningful context beyond that: it hits a live Amazon API, is throttled at ~1 req/min, and returns no buyer data. This is exactly the operational detail an agent needs to avoid spamming the endpoint.

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?

Front-loaded with return shape before the throttling caveat and routing advice. Every clause earns its place — no filler, no repetition of the title or annotations.

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 read-only list tool with no output schema, the description covers the return fields, the data exclusion, the throttling constraint, and routing to cached alternatives. An agent has everything needed to call it 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 only 50%, so the schema alone does not fully document the inputs. The description implies day-window and status filtering ('last N days', returned status field) and return ordering, but 'statuses' and 'days_back' remain undocumented in both places, so it only partially compensates for the coverage 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 individual orders (last N days)') and enumerates the returned fields (ids, status, dates, totals) with an explicit exclusion (no buyer data). It also distinguishes itself from get_daily_sales and get_revenue_summary, so an agent can tell it apart without opening a schema.

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?

Gives an explicit gating condition ('use ONLY when you need order-level rows') and names two alternatives with the exact case that selects each (charts/trends -> get_daily_sales, single total -> get_revenue_summary). Nothing is left to inference.

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