wb_orders_client_info

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It only states the data scope and does not disclose whether the operation is read-only, how invalid or non-Turkey order IDs are handled, whether pagination or rate limits apply, or what the response looks like. The description is not misleading, but it reveals very little behavior.

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 short sentence that front-loads the core domain and scope. The parenthetical Russian translation is redundant for an English-facing tool, but it does not add meaningful length or confusion.

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 no output schema, no annotations, and a description that only names the resource, the agent lacks critical information about the return structure, error cases, and invocation constraints. For a one-parameter tool, the description is enough to guess the operation but not enough to call it with confidence.

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 only implies that order_ids refer to the cross-border Turkey orders, but it does not explain the ID format, multiplicity, constraints, or how they map to buyer data. This adds minimal value beyond the parameter name in 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?

The description identifies the resource (buyer data) and a clear scope (cross-border orders from Turkey), which helps differentiate it from siblings like wb_dbs_orders_client, wb_cc_orders_client, and wb_orders_list. However, it lacks an explicit verb like 'get' or 'return', so the operation must be inferred from the tool name and input schema.

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 provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It does not mention exclusions, prerequisites, order status constraints, or conditions under which a different order-related tool would be more appropriate.

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