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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds that results are paged and enumerates which fields come back, which is useful context, but says nothing about rate limits, total counts, or the per-region data storage behavior hinted at by override_location.

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 tight sentences: scope first, returned content second, pagination and the backing endpoint last. No filler, and the most decision-relevant information (what resource, what scope) is front-loaded.

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 listing tool with full schema coverage and no output schema, the description supplies the essential shape of the response and the paging behavior. It omits return ordering and how the region override affects results, but those are minor gaps given the rich schema.

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 every parameter (page, page_size, since, event_id, event_date_id, override_location) is already documented in the schema. The description only restates the optional date filter and paging, adding no syntax or format detail beyond the structured fields.

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 states a specific verb and resource ('List the orders for an event') and even enumerates the returned fields (buyer name/email, financial status, totals, discounts, payment type, sales channel). It also notes the optional per-date scope, which distinguishes it from the single-record sibling humanitix_get_order.

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?

Usage is implied rather than stated: 'for an event (optionally one date of it)' signals when to narrow by event_date_id, but there is no explicit guidance on when to choose this over humanitix_get_order or humanitix_list_tickets. No exclusions or prerequisites are given.

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