Get order detail

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint and openWorldHint, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds valuable detail about the return content (current status and every partial execution), which goes beyond the generic read-only hint and helps the agent understand the tool's output scope.

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 sentences, both purposeful: the first states the action and key details, the second gives the usage context. No redundant phrasing or fluff.

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 read operation with one parameter and no output schema, the description adequately explains what the response contains and when to use it. It could be slightly more explicit about what 'regular order' excludes (e.g., conditional orders), but the sibling list provides context.

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 provides 100% coverage, describing orderId as returned by toss_get_orders or toss_submit_prepared_order. The description does not add extra meaning beyond this, so the baseline of 3 applies.

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 tool gets one regular order with its current status and partial executions. The use of 'one regular order' distinguishes it from toss_get_orders (plural) and conditional order tools, 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 provides a clear use case: 'Use it to confirm what actually filled after submitting an order.' This gives explicit guidance on when to use the tool, though it does not explicitly mention alternatives or when not to use it, which would warrant a 5.

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