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

Annotations already declare the operation read-only and open-world, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds useful behavioral context by stating that the response includes positions, taxes, and totals, but it does not describe error behavior or any access constraints.

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 a single, front-loaded sentence that directly states what the tool returns. It contains no boilerplate or repetition and is appropriately short for a simple one-parameter getter.

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 one-parameter read tool, the description covers the key return composition—positions, taxes, and totals—while annotations cover safety and the schema fully documents the input. It is adequate, though without an output schema it could say slightly more about the returned order 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%, and the single parameter is documented as the order id taken from bexio_list_orders. The description adds no additional parameter semantics beyond what the schema already provides, which is the baseline case for full schema coverage.

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 identifies the specific resource and scope: one sales order including its positions, taxes, and totals. It is clear what the tool retrieves, though it does not explicitly name the sibling bexio_list_orders as the alternative for multiple 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?

There is no explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus bexio_list_orders or other get tools. The schema mentions that the order id comes from bexio_list_orders, but the description itself gives no usage context or exclusions.

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