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

Beyond the readOnlyHint/openWorldHint annotations, it discloses that results contain buyer personal data — a material handling consideration not expressed anywhere in structured fields — and previews the returned fields. The 'Read-only' restatement adds nothing the annotation already says, which keeps it out of the top band.

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?

Three tight sentences, front-loaded with what is returned, then filters, then the PII caveat. No filler and nothing redundant beyond the minor 'Read-only' echo.

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?

With no output schema, the description usefully enumerates the return shape and flags PII; pagination is covered by the schema. It lacks detail on result ordering or behavior past the 100-item page cap, a small residual gap for a list tool.

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 eventId, limit, offset, match, states and updatedSince are already fully documented in the schema. The description only restates the three filter concepts without adding format or combination semantics, so the baseline of 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 ('List the orders of an event') and enumerates the returned payload (buyer name/email, state, price breakdown, timestamps), which cleanly separates it from the singular universe_get_order sibling.

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 spells out the available filter modes (state, text match, updated-since), giving clear context for when this tool fits. It never explicitly routes the agent to universe_get_order for a single order or to the sales/reporting siblings, so it stops short of full when-not guidance.

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