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 real value by enumerating the returned payload (restaurant, customer, items, costs, expected pickup date/time, status), which matters since there is no output schema. It does not cover failure behavior for a nonexistent id, keeping it short of a 5.

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?

One front-loaded sentence covering verb, resource, key, return contents, and semantics, followed by a terse endpoint mapping. No filler or redundancy.

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 single-item read with a fully documented one-parameter schema, the description supplies the field-level return context that the absent output schema would otherwise provide. The only gap is no mention of shipday_get_order as the delivery-order counterpart.

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% and the single order_id parameter is fully documented in the schema, including positivity and max constraints. The description adds only the word 'numeric', which is already implied by the integer type, so baseline 3 applies.

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 (Get), a specific resource (a pickup order), the lookup key (numeric id), and even clarifies what 'pickup' means (customer collects it). It is distinguishable from the sibling shipday_get_order by the pickup scope, and the GET /pickup-orders/{orderId} mapping removes any ambiguity.

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 makes clear this only applies to pickup orders (not delivery orders), which implies when it should be chosen, but it never explicitly says to use shipday_get_order for delivery orders or what to do when the id type is unknown. Usage is inferable but not stated.

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