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

The annotations cover the safety behavior (readOnlyHint), while the description adds transparency about the content of the returned object by specifying that it includes the 'subscriber and line items.' This adds valuable context beyond what the metadata provides.

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 definition is a single, focused sentence that is front-loaded and contains zero unnecessary fluff, making it highly concise.

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?

Given the low complexity (1 parameter) and high-quality structural metadata (schema and annotations), the description is very complete. It successfully communicates what the agent will receive without needing to explain parameters or safety behaviors.

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?

Given that schema description coverage is 100%, the description provides no additional meaning or semantic value regarding the 'order_id' parameter beyond what is already provided in the input schema and annotations. Baseline score of 3 is appropriate.

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 is highly specific, using a clear verb ('Get') and defining the exact resource and its internal structure by listing included data points ('one order with its subscriber and line items'). This clearly defines the tool's scope.

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 the usage context (when one needs a complete order object) but provides no explicit guidance on when to prefer this tool over other subscription or subscriber retrieval tools from the sibling list.

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