Get order details

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and destructiveHint=false, covering the safety profile. The description adds the critical behavioral caveat that the response excludes order state, and notes the alternative for that data. It also reveals the underlying HTTP endpoint, providing extra context beyond annotations.

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 two sentences, each earning its place: the first states the resource and contents, the second warns about the missing state and directs to the sibling tool. No filler or unnecessary detail.

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 single-order retrieval with one parameter, the description covers what the response contains, what it omits, and the alternative for the omitted data. Combined with the rich annotations and simple schema, the agent has enough context to select and invoke 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?

The input schema fully documents order_id with a clear description ('the client-side id the order was created with'), achieving 100% schema description coverage. The tool description doesn't add further parameter semantics, but the schema already carries the burden, so the baseline score of 3 is appropriate.

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 clearly states it returns details of a single order and lists the included fields (cart, delivery_address, payment_type, store_id, create_time). It also distinguishes itself from get_orders_state by explicitly noting that order state is not included, differentiating it from the sibling tool.

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 implies this tool is for retrieving full order creation details, and explicitly points to get_orders_state for tracking state. While it doesn't enumerate all alternative tools, it names the key alternative for the missing state field, giving clear context for when to use this tool vs. get_orders_state.

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