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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and destructiveHint=false, so safety is covered. The description adds genuinely new context: that orders carry ship-to name, address and contact details (personal data), and that detail=OrderItems expands line items — useful for a read tool whose payload includes PII.

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 short sentences, all front-loaded: filtering mechanism first, then the detail option, then the data-sensitivity note. No sentence is redundant with the schema or annotations.

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 read-only list tool with full schema coverage and no output schema, the description covers purpose, filtering, expansion, and a notable PII warning. Minor gaps: no mention of pagination behavior or result shape, though the schema's pgnum/pgsiz descriptions partially compensate.

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 parameters are fully documented in the schema and baseline is 3. The description reinforces the rql parameter with an example and flags the detail expansion, but adds little beyond what the schema's own examples and enums already convey.

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 outbound orders') plus the underlying endpoint 'GET /orders', with the filtering mechanism named. It does not explicitly distinguish itself from siblings such as extensiv_get_order or extensiv_list_purchase_orders, so the reader must infer the difference from the verb alone.

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?

Provides concrete RQL examples and a hint about when to add detail=OrderItems, which implies how to use the tool. However, it never says when to choose this over extensiv_get_order or extensiv_list_purchase_orders, nor any exclusions or prerequisites.

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