ghl_get_orders

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It only states the action without revealing pagination behavior, return format, or whether filters are mandatory. The schema hints at filters, but the description adds no context beyond the action.

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 a single sentence with no redundancy, effectively stating the core function. It is appropriately concise and front-loaded.

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?

There is no output schema, and the description doesn't explain what the response contains or how pagination works. With 6 optional filter parameters and many sibling commerce tools, a single sentence is insufficient for an agent to correctly understand the tool's full behavior.

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 schema describes endAt, startAt, and contactId, but page, limit, and status lack descriptions. The description itself adds no parameter semantics. However, page and limit are standard pagination parameters, and status has an enum that is self-explanatory, so the gaps are acceptable.

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 verb 'Get' plus resource 'payment orders', clearly indicating it retrieves payment order data. However, it doesn't explicitly differentiate from the sibling 'ghl_get_order' (singular) or clarify the meaning of 'the location'.

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?

No guidance is provided about when to use this tool versus alternatives like ghl_get_order, ghl_get_transactions, or ghl_get_invoices. There are no mentions of use cases, prerequisites, or exclusions.

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