getOrder

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true, and destructiveHint=false, indicating a safe read operation. The description adds the rate limit group and HTTP method, but no additional behavioral traits beyond confirming it queries all statuses. The annotations carry most of the transparency burden.

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 front-loaded with a clear title and a concise two-sentence explanation, followed by relevant metadata (rate limits, HTTP method, tags). Every piece serves a purpose with no redundancy.

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 read-only, single-order retrieval tool with full schema coverage and informative annotations, the description covers the core functionality, status scope, and rate limit group. No output schema is present, but the return format is not critical for tool selection. The description is contextually 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?

Schema coverage is 100%, so the schema already documents both parameters (orderId and account) with descriptions. The description does not add any further parameter-specific meaning or usage details beyond what the schema provides.

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 retrieves detailed information for a specific order (주문 상세 조회) and explicitly mentions it can query orders in any status. This distinguishes it from sibling tools like getOrders (which lists orders) and cancelOrder/modifyOrder (which mutate 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?

The description implies the tool should be used when you need details of a specific order, but does not provide explicit guidance on when not to use it or cite alternatives. However, the context of sibling tools makes the use case fairly clear.

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