Карточка заказа

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, openWorldHint, idempotentHint, and destructiveHint=false. The description goes beyond these by disclosing that a non-existent order returns data:null rather than an error, and that item lists are capped at 100 entries. These are meaningful behavioral facts not captured by annotations or schema.

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?

The description is one dense paragraph with every sentence carrying essential information: return contents, accepted id forms, the #1001 distinction with a routing instruction, and the not-found behavior. Nothing is redundant or 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?

With one parameter fully documented in the schema, no output schema to rely on, and annotations covering the safety profile, the description provides the needed return-shape details, id-format nuance, and error semantics. An agent has everything necessary to invoke and interpret this tool 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?

The schema already provides 100% coverage for the single id parameter, including the exact same guidance about numeric id vs gid:// vs #1001. The description repeats this but does not add additional parameter-level semantics beyond what the schema already states, so it stays at the baseline for full schema coverage.

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?

The description opens with a specific verb and resource: returns one complete order. It enumerates the concrete contents (items, totals, address, note, tags, shipments with tracking numbers), which makes the tool's scope immediately clear and distinguishes it from list_orders and other sibling tools.

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 explicitly explains when this tool is appropriate, including the id format accepted, and directly routes the agent to list_orders with query "name:#1001" when only the order number is available. This is clear usage guidance with an explicit alternative.

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