list_customer_orders

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden. It describes the operation as 'List' which implies read-only, but does not explicitly confirm no side effects, error behavior, or data safety. For a simple list operation, this is minimally adequate but lacks explicit transparency.

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?

Three concise sentences: first delivers the core purpose, second provides usage context, third emphasizes a requirement. No redundant words and information is front-loaded.

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?

For a simple one-parameter list operation with an output schema, the description covers the main use case and gives usage context. It could mention what happens when no orders exist or the customer is not found, but overall it is sufficiently complete given the tool's simplicity.

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?

Input schema has 0% description coverage, and the description only repeats that customer_id is required, which is already in the schema. It does not explain the format, domain, or source of the customer ID, adding minimal semantic value beyond the schema.

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?

Description clearly states the tool lists orders associated with a specific customer, using a specific verb ('List') and resource ('orders'). It also distinguishes from sibling tools like lookup_order by noting it's for when no specific order ID is provided.

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?

Explicitly states when to use: 'Use this when the customer wants to view their orders but has not provided one specific order ID.' This provides a clear use case and implicitly excludes lookup_order, offering strong guidance.

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