Get orders

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and openWorldHint=true, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds useful behavioral context beyond annotations: it explains the tool's role in obtaining order IDs for subsequent modify/cancel operations and clarifies the regular-vs-conditional order distinction. It doesn't add details on pagination or other traits, but the schema covers those.

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: the first states the core purpose and scope, the second provides usage guidance and sibling differentiation. Every sentence earns its place, and it is front-loaded with the primary function.

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 tool with 6 parameters and no output schema, the description explains the primary use case (finding orderId, checking fills) and the key distinction from conditional orders. Combined with the detailed schema and annotations, the agent has enough context to select and invoke the tool correctly.

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 83% (>80%), so the schema documents parameters well. The description adds no parameter-specific semantics beyond 'filtered by status', which is already in the schema. Baseline 3 applies as the schema does the heavy lifting.

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 uses the specific verb 'Lists' with a clear resource ('regular orders in the account') and scope ('filtered by status'). It distinguishes itself from sibling tools by explicitly noting that conditional orders are handled separately by toss_get_conditional_orders.

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?

It explicitly states when to use the tool: to find the orderId needed by toss_prepare_order_modify and toss_prepare_order_cancel, or to check whether an order filled. It also gives an exclusion by pointing to the conditional orders alternative.

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