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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true and destructiveHint=false, so the safety profile is covered structurally. The description usefully adds the required scope (orders.read) but says nothing about result caps, pagination behavior, or the cost of embeds, which the schema only partly implies.

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?

A single compact sentence that front-loads the searchable dimensions and appends the permission note. No padding, but it is arguably too terse for a 7-parameter tool with a nested filters object.

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 search tool with fully documented schema and no output schema, the description covers purpose, filterable fields and auth requirement. The remaining gap is pagination/return-shape expectations, which the schema's offset description largely handles.

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 (embed, field, limit, offset, filters, order, direction) is already documented in detail, including filter key enumerations. The description only restates the filter domains, adding no syntax or format detail beyond the schema.

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?

States a specific verb (search) plus resource (orders) and names the filterable dimensions (status, delivery status, related company/individual/opportunity). It is clearly distinguishable from get_order and create_* siblings, though it does not contrast itself with sellsy_list_orders.

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?

Only guidance is the permission prerequisite "Needs orders.read." There is no explicit statement of when to prefer this search tool over sellsy_list_orders or sellsy_search (the generic one), leaving the choice to inference from the name.

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