list_sales_orders

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

Annotations already declare readOnly, idempotent, non-destructive, open-world semantics, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds one genuinely useful behavioral fact, the newest-first ordering, but says nothing about result volume or how pagination terminates beyond what the cursor schema states.

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?

A single front-loaded sentence with no filler; the default ordering constraint appears immediately and the optional filters follow.

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?

An output schema exists, so return values need no explanation, and the filters are fully specified by the schema. The definition is nearly complete; only the relationship to the sibling search tool is left unstated.

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%, so cursor, status enum, date_from/date_to formats, and page_size bounds are all documented in the schema. The description only restates the status and date-range filter categories, adding no syntax or defaults beyond what is already structured. Baseline 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?

The description names a specific verb (Browse) and resource (sales orders) plus the default sort order, so the operation is unambiguous. It does not explicitly distinguish itself from the sibling search_sales_orders, leaving the list-vs-search boundary to inference.

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?

Usage is implied: browse when you want a full listing with optional status/date filters, as opposed to the sibling search tool. There is no explicit statement of when to prefer this over search_sales_orders or what prerequisites apply, so guidance is only adequate.

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