get_order_by_client_id

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden for behavioral disclosure. It only states the operation without any details on safety, return format, error handling, or side effects. For a read operation, it lacks transparency about potential outcomes.

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?

Description is one short sentence with no wasted words. While it is concise, it could benefit from a bit more structure, such as a brief note on usage. Still, it is efficient for a simple tool.

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 low complexity (one required parameter, no output schema, no annotations), the description is minimally viable. It states the core function but lacks details on return values, error cases, or how it differs from similar tools like 'get_order_by_id'. Adequate but with gaps.

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 input schema already describes the parameter 'client_order_id' with sufficient clarity. The description adds no additional meaning beyond what the schema provides. Since schema coverage is 100%, baseline score of 3 is appropriate.

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 uses the verb 'Get' with a specific resource 'order' and a clear identifier 'client order ID'. It distinguishes from sibling tools like 'get_order_by_id' which uses internal ID. However, it could be more explicit about retrieval purpose.

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?

No guidance on when to use this tool vs alternatives like 'get_order_by_id' or 'cancel_order_by_client_id'. The description does not mention context such as when to prefer client ID vs internal ID.

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