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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and destructiveHint=false, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds real context: it consumes the private order link from email, it explicitly does not return the shipping address, and it does not mutate the order. This is useful beyond the annotations, though it doesn't mention rate limits or error behavior.

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?

Three efficient sentences, front-loaded with the usage condition, followed by what it returns and what it excludes. Every sentence adds distinct value and there is no redundancy.

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 single-parameter read-only tool with an output schema, the description is complete: it states the trigger, the return contents, and explicit exclusions. Nothing an agent needs to call it correctly is missing, and the output schema handles return structure.

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%, meaning the single parameter is already fully documented in the input schema. The description repeats that it 'takes the private order link from their order email' but adds no new syntax, format, or validation detail beyond what the schema provides. Baseline 3 is appropriate when the schema does the heavy lifting.

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 ('returns the order's status, its parts, how many have shipped, and any tracking numbers') and clearly distinguishes it from siblings like get_print_quote and reorder_from_order by describing exactly what it retrieves. An agent knows precisely what this tool does without opening the 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?

Explicitly states when to use it: 'when someone who ordered from 3D Printer on Demand asks where their order is or what state it is in.' It also states exclusions ('does not show the shipping address and it does not change the order'), which helps an agent avoid misusing it for address changes or order modifications.

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