Retrieve orders from the commerce sandbox, optionally filtered by user_ref, to inspect purchase history or verify order status during shopping-agent tests.
List orders, optionally filtered by user_ref.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| user_ref | No |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v0.1.0Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full behavioral burden. It implies a read operation via "List" but never states read-only semantics, auth/permission requirements, pagination behavior, or what the return contains.
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?
A single short sentence with no filler and the purpose front-loaded. It is efficient, though its brevity leaves behavioral and usage gaps rather than earning a 5.
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 single-parameter list tool with no output schema, the description covers purpose and the one filter, but omits read-only confirmation, pagination, and ordering behavior that an agent would need to call it confidently.
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 0% and there is one parameter. The description names user_ref as an optional filter, confirming its role and optionality, but adds no format, syntax, or expected-value detail beyond the schema.
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?
States a specific verb ("List") and resource ("orders"), so the agent knows this retrieves order collections. It does not explicitly distinguish itself from siblings like get_order or search_products, so it stops short of the top tier.
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 offers no when-to-use guidance, no conditions selecting it over get_order or create_order, and no prerequisites. It only states the optional filter, which is not usage guidance.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.