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

Annotations already declare readOnly, openWorld and non-destructive. The description adds genuinely useful context beyond them: page size (50 per page), the default filter combination, the polling mechanism, and a warning that shipment details are personal data. No return schema is provided, and it doesn't state an authorization requirement, keeping it from a 5.

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 dense sentences, front-loaded with scope and content, followed by defaults then polling guidance. Every sentence earns its place with 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?

No output schema exists, yet the description enumerates the returned fields and page size, and it covers defaults and polling. An agent has everything needed to invoke it correctly without opening the schema.

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%, so all five parameters are already documented with their enums and defaults. The description restates the OPEN/FBR defaults and the polling intent but adds no syntax or format detail beyond the schema, so 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?

States a specific verb and resource ('List the seller's bol orders') and enumerates exactly what each record contains (items, EANs, quantities, prices, fulfilment method, shipment details). The scoping detail makes it clearly distinguishable from bol_get_order.

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 the default behavior (only OPEN orders fulfilled by the retailer FBR) and names the polling parameters (change_interval_minute / latest_change_date) with their purpose. It does not name the sibling bol_get_order as the alternative for fetching a single order, so it stops short of full when-not guidance.

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