list_store_orders

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must fully disclose behavior. It only states 'list orders', implying read-only, but does not mention side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or pagination behavior. The lack of behavioral detail is a significant gap.

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 sentences, front-loaded with main action, no unnecessary words. Every sentence adds value.

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 complexity (4 params, no annotations, output schema exists), the description covers basic purpose and a key filter, but lacks details on pagination, prerequisites (connected store), and the fact that store_id is required. The presence of an output schema reduces the need to describe return values, but other context is missing.

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 adds meaning for store_id and campaign_id (revenue attribution), but ignores offset and count parameters, which are crucial for pagination. With 4 parameters and 0% schema coverage, the description only partially explains them.

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 tool lists orders from a connected store, with optional campaign_id filtering. It distinguishes from sibling list tools by specifying 'orders from a store', though it doesn't explicitly differentiate from list_store_carts or list_store_products.

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 and optionally filtering by campaign_id for revenue attribution. However, it provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like list_store_products, and no prerequisites (e.g., store must be connected) are stated.

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