list_orders

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

The description mentions a limit of 100 but does not disclose other behavioral traits such as whether it is read-only, if there are rate limits, or any side effects. Since no annotations are provided, the description carries the full burden, which is insufficient.

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 a single sentence that efficiently conveys the core purpose and key constraint. It is front-loaded and contains no redundant words, though it could be slightly expanded for completeness.

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?

With an output schema present, return values are not needed. However, the description lacks context on pagination behavior and does not mention when to use this tool over similar siblings. It is minimally complete but not thorough.

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 adds value for the 'status_id' parameter (with examples) and the 'limit' parameter (max 100), but the 'page' parameter is not explained. Given 0% schema coverage, the description partially compensates but leaves a gap.

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 the action ('List orders') and the filtering criterion ('by status ID'), with concrete examples of status IDs. It distinguishes itself from sibling tools like 'get_order' (single order) and 'search_orders' (more flexible search).

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 like 'search_orders' or 'get_order'. The description does not specify required permissions or prerequisites, nor does it mention when it should not be used.

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