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

Annotations already provide readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true, and destructiveHint=false. The description adds valuable context by specifying the kind of data returned (status, dates, distance, partner id) and the bulk execution behavior ('Bulk support: accepts order_ids'). This goes beyond what annotations alone convey, 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?

The description is exceptionally concise: two sentences that front-load the core purpose and add a note on bulk support. Every word contributes meaning, with no redundancy or filler.

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 simple detail-retrieval tool with two parameters, annotations, and no output schema, the description is fairly complete: it names the returned fields and the bulk option. It lacks details on edge cases (e.g., when both order_id and order_ids are provided) but is adequate for typical use.

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 carries the burden of explaining parameters. It does add meaning to order_ids by clarifying it enables batch execution, but order_id is not explained beyond its name and required status in the schema. The description partially compensates for the schema's lack of documentation.

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's purpose: 'Detalhe de um pedido específico do iFood' (detail of a specific iFood order) and lists the specific data returned (status, dates, delivery distance, partner id). This distinguishes it from sibling 'ifood_vendas_pedidos_listar' which is for listing orders, and the scope is specific to a single order or batch of 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?

The description implies when to use it (for details of a specific order) but does not explicitly compare with alternatives or state exclusions. It mentions bulk support for order_ids, which is a usage hint, but lacks explicit 'when to use vs listar' guidance.

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