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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true, and destructiveHint=false. The description adds valuable non-obvious behavior: quote/pricing unavailability and the need to poll, plus the bulk execution capability. This goes beyond the annotations without contradicting them.

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 sentences, each with a distinct purpose: purpose, timing caveat, and bulk support. No filler or tautology; it is appropriately front-loaded with the core purpose.

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 tool with strong annotations, the description covers the essential purpose, key caveats (polling), and bulk support. However, there is no output schema and the description does not detail what 'full details' includes or explain the account parameter, leaving slight ambiguity.

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 description coverage is 0%, so the description must compensate. The only parameter explained is order_ids ('Bulk support: accepts order_ids for batched execution'), while account and order_id are left to type names only, with no clarity on their roles or format.

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 clearly states the tool retrieves full details for a Productions order. The verb 'retrieves' and resource 'Productions order' make it specific, and the mention of 'full details' distinguishes it from list-style siblings like elevenlabs_public_list_orders.

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?

Provides clear usage context: it notes that quote and pricing info may not be available immediately and suggests polling until ready, and it mentions bulk support via order_ids. However, it doesn't explicitly compare to alternatives like list_orders or state when not to use this tool.

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