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

Annotations already declare readOnly/openWorld/non-destructive, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds genuinely behavioral detail the annotations don't: default sort order (newest first), the set of filterable fields, and the underlying endpoint GET /api/v6.1/sale_orders.

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 compact sentences: payload contents first, then filter surface, then ordering and endpoint. Front-loaded and waste-free, though the raw endpoint string is the least useful element.

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 and a nested free-form `filters` object across 9 params, listing the returned fields and the filterable field set is exactly what an agent needs to construct a useful call. Pagination and sort mechanics are left entirely to the schema, which is acceptable since it documents them at 100% coverage.

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%, so baseline is 3, but the description adds real value for the open-ended `filters` object by enumerating which fields are filterable (id, order_date, created_at, updated_at) with operator hints. It says nothing extra about sort/limit/offset/fields, which the schema already documents well.

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?

Specific verb + resource ('List sales orders') plus the exact field set returned, which lets an agent distinguish it from the single-record getfly_get_sale_order sibling. It stops short of naming that sibling explicitly, so it is clear but not maximally differentiated.

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?

'Filters: id, order_date, created_at, updated_at (eq, gte, lte, between)' and 'Newest first' imply when this listing is appropriate and how to narrow it, but there is no explicit when-to-use/when-not or pointer to getfly_get_sale_order for a single record.

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