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

Annotations already cover readOnly, openWorld and non-destructive, so the bar is lower, yet the description adds real behavior: the response contains personal data, replies are cached for an hour (freshness caveat), and the underlying endpoint is GET /v2/order/{order_id}. It stops short of noting auth or rate-limit behavior, so not 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?

A single dense sentence front-loads the identity and payload, followed by two short high-value caveats (personal data, caching) and the endpoint. 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?

One-parameter read tool with no output schema; the description compensates by describing the returned fields, the personal-data sensitivity, and the one-hour cache, which is everything an agent needs to call and interpret it correctly.

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 order_id property description already specifies UUID format and its source (ticketsauce_list_orders). The description merely restates 'by id' without adding format or provenance detail beyond the schema; 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 and resource ('One order by id') and enumerates the payload (buyer details, totals, tickets with type, name, price, redeemed state, promo code). The singular 'one order by id' clearly contrasts with the sibling ticketsauce_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?

Usage is only implied: an agent infers this is the single-record lookup versus list_orders, and the schema notes the id comes from ticketsauce_list_orders. The description itself offers no explicit when/when-not guidance or named alternatives.

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