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

readOnlyHint=true already tells the agent this is a safe read, and the description adds genuinely new behavior: which relationships are sideloaded by default and how to change them. It stops short of covering error behavior for unknown ids or any rate limits, so it is good but not exhaustive.

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?

One dense sentence that front-loads the resource and return content before the override detail. The trailing raw endpoint reference ('GET /api/4/orders/{id}') is mildly redundant but cheap and useful for doc mapping.

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?

There is no output schema, so the description carries the burden of describing returns, and it does so (totals, deposit, payment state, default sideloaded relations). Minor omissions remain around failure modes and whether the include string is additive or replacing for non-default relations.

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 example relationship list is duplicated from the schema, so the schema does most of the work. However, the description adds the fact that customer and lines are sideloaded by default and that include overrides that default — a semantic the input schema never states.

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 (Fetch) plus resource (one order) and enumerates what comes back: totals, deposit, payment state. The singular 'one order' plus the required order_id cleanly separates it from the plural sibling booqable_list_orders 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?

The description explains default sideloading and how to override it via include, which is practical guidance, but it never says when to call this instead of booqable_list_orders or booqable_get_customer, nor any prerequisite (e.g. valid order id). Usage is implied rather than directed.

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