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

Goes well past the readOnly/idempotent annotations: it states the authentication requirement (`tronsave_login` api-key mode or an `Authorization: ApiKey` header), warns never to pass API keys as tool arguments, and notes the server forwards the session key. The FRESHNESS note that order state changes within seconds and should be re-read before acting is exactly the kind of behavioral context annotations cannot carry.

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?

Purpose is front-loaded, auth and routing follow, and the labeled FRESHNESS caveat is easy to scan. It is slightly dense for a one-parameter read, with some backticked identifier load, but no sentence is 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?

An output schema exists, so return values need not be explained; what remains — auth mode, key handling, sibling routing, and state-freshness timing — is all covered. Nothing an agent needs to call this correctly is missing.

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 100% and the single `orderId` parameter already documents the hex format and provenance from `internal.order.create`. The description's 'by order ID' phrasing adds nothing beyond that, so the baseline 3 applies.

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?

Specific verb plus resource and scope: 'Fetch full details for one internal-account order by order ID.' It also distinguishes itself from the sibling `tronsave_get_order`, explaining that the sibling returns the same order under wallet-signature auth, so an agent can route without opening either 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?

Explicit when-to-use: monitoring fulfillment after `tronsave_internal_order_create`, or answering a status question about a specific order id. The alternative path (`tronsave_get_order` for wallet-signature auth) is named with its selecting condition.

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