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

Adds material behavior beyond the read-only/open-world annotations: the default 30-day window, ANDed conditions, the crucial fact that order_status is applied to the fetched page because the vendor has no documented status filter, the 100-row cap, and offset-based paging. It also lists the return payload fields.

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, front-loaded sentences that place the scope and default behavior first and the sibling pointer second. Slightly compressed by listing all five date axes, but nothing is pure 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?

With no output schema, the description covers the return shape (invoice number/order_id, statuses in words, dates, amounts, contacts, shipping, tracking, line items), pagination, default behavior, and the filter quirk. Nothing an agent needs to invoke it correctly appears 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 already 100%, so baseline is 3; the description adds cross-parameter meaning the schema cannot: filter conjunction, the default date window, and especially that order_status is a post-fetch narrowing requiring another filter to be useful. It does not mention the sort_by default shown in the schema.

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 plus the exact filter axes (five date ranges and/or invoice number), and explicitly says to use deconetwork_get_order for a single order. It does not differentiate from deconetwork_list_orders_due, which overlaps on due-date queries, so an agent choosing between them is left to infer.

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?

Gives strong when/how guidance: conditions are ANDed, no filter returns the last 30 days by date ordered, order_status must be combined with a date range or invoice number, and results page via next_offset. The one missing routing rule is when to prefer deconetwork_list_orders_due instead.

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