tiendanube_get_checkout

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

No annotations provided, so description carries full burden. It states the operation (retrieve) and indicates it's a GET, but does not disclose safety, idempotency, error behavior (e.g., missing checkout), or any side effects. Minimal behavioral context beyond 'retrieve'.

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?

Single sentence with no wasted words. Action is front-loaded. Title-like structure (GET CHECKOUT) clearly indicates HTTP method. Efficient and scannable.

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 retrieval tool with no output schema and no annotations, the description lists key return components. However, it omits details like pagination (if any), error handling, or field format. Adequate for basic use but not comprehensive.

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%, both parameters have descriptions. The description adds context by listing example fields ('items, customer, totals and status') that the 'fields' parameter can include, but does not provide additional semantics or format details beyond 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?

The description clearly states the verb 'Retrieve' and resource 'checkout by ID', and lists included data (items, customer, totals, status). It distinguishes from sibling tools like tiendanube_get_abandoned_checkout by specifying it's a general checkout retrieval.

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?

Usage context is implied as a basic retrieval tool, but no explicit guidance on when to use or avoid, nor mention of alternatives or prerequisites. The description does not differentiate from related tools like get_cart or get_order.

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