TRON infrastructure for AI agents.

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 discloses 'Auth required' which is critical behavioral context, but omits other key traits like read-only status, pagination behavior, or what the response structure looks like.

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 crisp sentences with no waste: the first establishes purpose and scope, the second states the auth constraint. Information is appropriately 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?

Given the tool has only one simple parameter with complete schema coverage and no output schema, the description is minimally adequate. However, it should ideally clarify the relationship to 'list_orders' and confirm the read-only nature given the lack of annotations.

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 100% (the 'status' param is documented as 'Filter by status.'). The description adds that the filter is 'optional', confirming the zero required parameters, but this is largely redundant with the structured schema, meeting the baseline expectation.

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 verb (List) and resource (standing orders), distinguishing the scope from 'list_orders' by specifying 'standing orders'. However, it does not explicitly differentiate when to use this versus its sibling 'list_orders' or 'get_order'.

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 mentions the 'optional status filter' which implies usage, but provides no explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like 'list_orders' or 'get_order', nor any prerequisites beyond the auth note.

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