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

Annotations already cover the safety profile (readOnlyHint=true, destructiveHint=false), and the description adds real context on top: auth requirement, newest-first ordering, dollar-denominated money, and the fields surfaced. It does not discuss pagination behavior, though ordering is disclosed.

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?

Front-loaded with purpose and trigger phrases before the routing exclusions. The example queries add genuine matching value rather than filler, though the definition is on the longer side.

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 list tool with a rich output schema and full annotation coverage, this covers everything an agent needs: what it returns, ordering, auth, and which siblings to prefer. Nothing material is missing.

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% (the single 'limit' param documents range 1-50 and default 20), so the schema carries the full burden. The description adds nothing about the limit parameter, which is the correct baseline of 3.

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 (Show) and resource (the authenticated user's own orders on the XP marketplace) plus the scope 'where each one stands'. It is clearly distinguishable from siblings like get_my_tickets and list_my_listings.

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?

Gives explicit trigger phrases ('where is my order', 'did my tickets go through', 'what did I buy for Saturday', 'when do my tickets arrive') and three explicit when-not routes naming the correct alternatives (get_my_tickets, list_my_listings, get_my_bids).

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