List orders

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, destructiveHint=false and openWorldHint, so safety behavior is fully covered. The description adds only a bare mention of date range, search and pagination, without disclosing default page size, result shape, or how results are ordered beyond the schema's per-field defaults.

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 short sentences with the scope constraint front-loaded and zero filler; nothing to trim.

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?

With 12 optional parameters, no output schema and no required fields, the schema carries most of the load and does it well. The description still omits how pagination should be driven across pages and roughly what the response contains, which an agent listing large order sets would want.

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 100%, including the formType/formSlug pairing, ISO 8601 patterns, default org slug and the continuationToken hint, so the baseline is 3. The description restates the form-scoping rule and the filter families but contributes no semantics the schema lacks.

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 and resource ('List orders') plus the two scopes (organization-wide vs. single form gated on formType + formSlug). It does not distinguish itself from lookalike siblings such as helloasso_list_payments or helloasso_list_items, so an agent must infer the boundary.

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 gives an implicit usage rule — supply formType + formSlug to narrow to one form — but never states when to use this instead of helloasso_get_order for a single record, nor which of pageIndex vs. continuationToken to prefer. Usage is inferable but not spelled out.

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