public_get_order

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true, destructiveHint=false, and openWorldHint=true, so the safety profile is covered structurally. The description adds nothing on top of that: no note about auth/scope (public endpoint), no statement of what an order record contains, and no error behavior if the order_id is unknown.

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?

Two words is not conciseness here, it is under-specification; nothing is front-loaded because there is nothing beyond the title. The single phrase earns its place only as a label, not as usable instruction.

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?

There is no output schema, so the description must carry the burden of explaining what is returned, and it does not. For an openWorld public API endpoint with no other documentation, an agent has no way to know what a retrieved 'order' includes or how to handle missing records.

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% for the single required order_id parameter, so the schema fully documents the input. The description adds no additional semantics (e.g., ID format, scope of the lookup), so the baseline of 3 applies.

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?

"Get Order" names a verb and a resource, but it is essentially a restatement of the tool name (public_get_order) with no added specificity. It does not distinguish this tool from close siblings such as public_get_order_deliverables, public_list_orders, or public_get_media_info, so an agent gets no signal about what is actually retrieved.

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 when-to-use guidance, no prerequisites, and no reference to any alternative. Among many get_* and public_* siblings, the agent must guess when this is the right call versus public_list_orders or public_get_order_deliverables.

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