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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, but the description adds substantial behavioral context: 'Read-only despite using POST', pagination mechanics (pass after_tag with the SAME other parameters), a 35-day maximum date range, and a 500-per-page limit. This is rich beyond the annotation.

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?

The description is front-loaded with the primary search conditions, then covers pagination, a behavioral caveat, and the endpoint. It is dense but every sentence or clause provides useful information with no 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?

For a complex 6-parameter tool with nested objects and no output schema, the description covers the date range cap, pagination, return include flags, and the read-only nature. It misses whether dateRange and orders are mutually exclusive or whether one is required, so it is strong but not fully complete.

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 the baseline is 3. The description adds the 35-day date-range cap and the pagination cursor reuse rule, which are not fully captured in the schema, but it does not elaborate on each parameter's individual meaning beyond what the schema already provides.

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 ('Find') and resource ('orders'), with clear scope: date range or list of orderNo/id, optional status filter. It does not explicitly name or differentiate from sibling tools like get_orders, so it falls just short of a 5.

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?

It gives clear context for when to use the tool (find orders in a date range or by a list, optionally filtered by status). However, it does not mention when not to use it or point to an alternative sibling such as get_orders, so it stops short of explicit alternative guidance.

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