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

The readOnlyHint annotation already discloses that this is a safe read operation. The description adds value by specifying the default order ('newest first'), the output shape ('Returns a HAL collection embedding fx:transactions'), and the exact REST endpoint, none of which are present in the annotations or schema.

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 concise sentences front-load the core purpose ('List a store's transactions... newest first') and then add efficient supplementary details about return format and endpoint. There is no redundant or filler content.

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 operation, the combination of schema (100% parameter coverage), annotations (readOnlyHint), and the description's output shape, ordering, and endpoint fully equips an agent to invoke it. No output schema exists, but the description names the HAL collection return type, covering the main missing piece.

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 seven parameters are already documented, giving a baseline of 3. The description does not add specific parameter-level semantics beyond the schema's own descriptions, though it does state the default ordering that the 'order' parameter can override.

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?

The description uses a specific verb and resource: 'List a store's transactions (orders)', and adds the ordering 'newest first'. It clearly identifies the target entity as transactions, distinguishing it from sibling list tools for carts, coupons, customers, etc.

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 implies use when listing a store's transactions, and the endpoint confirms the resource, but it does not explicitly state when to prefer this over alternatives such as foxy_get_transaction for a single record or other list tools. There is clear context, but no exclusions or alternative routing.

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