get_order_pdf

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

The description adds no behavioral context beyond what annotations already provide. It does not explain what 'Show PDF' means—whether it returns a file, a URL, or binary data—or any side effects. Annotations indicate read-only and idempotent behavior, but the description itself contributes nothing enriching.

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?

At only two words, the description is extremely brief, but this is under-specification rather than effective conciseness. A concise description should still convey the tool's purpose and behavior; 'Show PDF' omits critical details and does not earn its place as a standalone description.

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?

The description is severely incomplete for a tool with no output schema. It does not explain what the function returns (e.g., PDF content, base64, file reference), nor does it distinguish this PDF from other document PDFs in the sibling tools. Given the simplicity of the schema, the description should at least clarify the output format and usage context.

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%: order_id is described as 'the id of the order' and logopaper as 'Whether the PDF should be generated using the letterhead, or not.' The tool description adds no additional parameter meaning, but since the schema already provides full descriptions, the baseline 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 'Show PDF' is essentially a restatement of the tool name 'get_order_pdf' without specifying the resource ('order'). It uses the vague verb 'Show' rather than a more specific verb like 'Retrieve' or 'Generate', and does not distinguish from siblings such as get_invoice_pdf or get_quote_pdf.

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?

There is no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. The description gives no context about prerequisites, typical scenarios, or alternatives. The only hint comes from the tool name, not the description.

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