get_orders_by_customer_name

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. It does disclose that the return is a dict and may contain error information, but it does not mention specifics like exact matching behavior, duplicate customer names, or authentication requirements. Some behavioral details are present, but key operational nuances remain undocumented.

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 well-structured, with an opening sentence followed by Args and Returns sections. It contains no filler and is easy to parse, though the Args section is redundant with the schema but necessary due to schema lacking descriptions.

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 tool with an output schema, the description covers the core behavior and parameter, but it omits usage alternatives and edge cases (e.g., multiple customers with the same name). It is adequate but not fully complete.

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 schema coverage is 0%, so the description's Args section provides the only meaning for the parameter: 'customer_name: The customer name to search for'. This is a basic definition but does not add depth like case sensitivity, full vs. partial name, or formatting requirements.

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 action ('Retrieve all orders') and the scope ('for a specific customer by name'), using a specific verb and resource. It distinguishes itself from sibling tools like get_orders_by_customer_id (by ID) and get_all_orders (all customers).

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 that this tool should be used when a customer name is available, but it does not explicitly mention alternatives or exclusion criteria. Sibling tools like get_orders_by_customer_id are not referenced, so the guidance is only implicit.

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