get_all_orders

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

With no annotations, the description bears full responsibility for behavioral disclosure. It does reveal that the operation returns a dictionary containing all orders or error information, which is useful, but it does not explicitly state safety (e.g., read-only nature) or any potential side effects. For a simple retrieval, this is adequate but not rich.

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 concise and front-loaded: a single clear sentence stating the action, followed by a brief return description. Every word adds value, and there is no redundancy or filler.

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's simplicity (no parameters, no nested objects) and the presence of an output schema, the description sufficiently covers behavior. It states the return format (dict of all orders or error info) and does not need to elaborate further. The context signals indicate the output schema exists, so return structure details are already captured.

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?

There are zero parameters, and the schema description coverage is 100% (vacuously). Per the baseline rule for 0 parameters, a score of 4 is appropriate since the description does not need to explain parameters that do not exist.

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 'Retrieve all orders with complete details,' which is a specific verb+resource combination. The phrase 'all orders' distinguishes it from sibling tools like get_order_by_id or get_orders_by_customer_name, making the purpose unambiguous.

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 use when you need all orders, but it does not explicitly mention when not to use it or provide alternatives. There is no comparison to sibling tools, so the guidance is only implied rather than explicit.

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