list_ecommerce_orders

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must convey behavioral traits. It only indicates a read operation (listing) but does not mention pagination, rate limits, idempotency, or that it returns a list of orders. The output schema exists but is not referenced in the description.

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 concise with two short sentences. The main action and key filters are front-loaded. No unnecessary words.

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?

Given the presence of an output schema, the description can omit return value details. However, it lacks essential information for a listing tool, such as default pagination, ordering, or filter behavior (exact match, case sensitivity). It is minimally adequate.

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 0%, so the description must compensate. It partially explains 'email' and 'connection_id' (for filtering), but omits 'limit' and 'offset' which control pagination. No parameter details like format or behavior are given.

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') and resource ('e-commerce orders'), and mentions specific filters. It is distinct from siblings like 'get_ecommerce_order' (single order) and 'list_ecommerce_connections' (different resource). However, it does not explicitly contrast with these siblings.

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 implies usage for listing orders with filtering, and hints at a revenue tracking context. It does not provide explicit when-to-use or when-not-to-use guidance, nor does it mention alternative tools like 'get_ecommerce_order' for individual orders.

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