search_orders

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

The description discloses no behavioral traits beyond what the annotations already convey. It does not mention search scope, matching behavior, pagination, or response format. Since readOnlyHint is false, the description could clarify mutability, but it remains silent, providing zero additional transparency.

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 extremely short, but conciseness requires that every word earns its place. Here, the two words merely restate the tool name, providing no informative content. This is under-specification, not efficient structure.

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 tool has four parameters and no output schema, so the description should explain what the body array does, how search differs from list, and what the response contains. It does none of these, making the description completely inadequate for an agent to use the tool effectively.

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 description does not reference any parameters, but the input schema provides complete descriptions for all four parameters (body, limit, offset, order_by), including enum details and constraints. With 100% schema coverage, a baseline of 3 is appropriate; the description adds no value beyond the schema but does not need to compensate.

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 'Search orders' simply restates the tool name, adding no detail about what constitutes a search, which fields can be searched, or how this differs from list_orders. It is effectively a tautology, providing only a vague verb+resource without any scope or differentiation.

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 gives no guidance on when to use this tool versus sibling tools like list_orders, get_order, or search_quotes. There is no mention of appropriate contexts, exclusions, or alternatives, leaving the agent without decision-making information.

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