Orders_getOrder

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the behavioral disclosure burden. It does add an execution-context trait by saying the tool runs in the user's Kuudo deployment rather than here, which is meaningful. But it omits other behavioral details such as required permissions, error behavior, and return format.

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 compact and to the point, with no redundant elaboration. The deployment note is front-loaded and the actual purpose appears in the second sentence. The cryptic 'Catalog entry.' fragment is the only structural weakness.

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-style tool with no annotations, no output schema, and an empty input schema, the description should clarify the required order identifier and the relationship between the catalog entry and actual invocation. It explains where the tool runs but leaves the call contract ambiguous, so an agent is not equipped to invoke it 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?

The description mentions 'the order that you specify,' but the input schema declares zero properties and only allows additionalProperties. The agent cannot determine what to pass, such as an orderId or an order object. The description does not compensate for the schema's lack of parameter definition.

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 states a clear action and resource: 'Returns the order that you specify.' This distinguishes it from order-item, address, and buyer-info siblings. However, the 'Catalog entry' prefix adds ambiguity and the description doesn't differentiate it from Ordersv2_getOrder.

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?

There is no guidance on when to use this tool instead of alternatives like Orders_getOrders or Ordersv2_getOrder. The deployment note ('Runs in your Kuudo deployment, not here') is environment context, not usage selection guidance, and no exclusions or conditions are given.

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