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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, so the safe-read profile is covered; the description adds genuine value by listing the returned payload fields and the underlying API endpoint (GET /v3/orders/{id}). It does not mention auth requirements or error behavior for an unknown id, 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?

Two compact clauses with zero filler; the resource and returned fields are front-loaded before the API mapping. Every phrase carries information.

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?

A simple single-parameter read with a safety annotation and no output schema; listing the returned fields compensates for the absent output schema. Only minor gaps remain (auth context, behavior on invalid id).

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 there is only one parameter, whose schema already documents 'The order id.' The description adds no format or validation detail 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?

States a specific verb and resource ('Get one order by id') and enumerates the returned fields (customer, tickets, price, status, additional fields). The emphasis on 'one ... by id' cleanly separates it from the sibling bookingkit_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?

Usage is implied by 'by id' — an agent knows to use it when a single order_id is available — but the description never names the alternative (bookingkit_list_orders) or states when not to use it. Guidance must be inferred rather than read.

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