rh11_orders_get

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, so the safety profile is known. The description adds no behavioral context such as error behavior, required permissions, or what 'detailed info' includes, making it minimally informative beyond the annotation.

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, direct sentence with no redundant information. It is front-loaded with the verb and clearly identifies the resource.

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 read-only getter with one well-documented parameter and existing annotation, the description is adequate to invoke the tool correctly. Lack of output schema details is a minor gap, but not required for basic invocation.

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 provides full 100% coverage for the lone parameter order_id ('Order identifier'). The description does not add further parameter-specific meaning or format details, so it stays at baseline.

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 tool retrieves detailed info for a specific order, using a specific verb ('Get') and resource ('Rhodium11 order'). It distinguishes from siblings like rh11_orders_list (listing) and rh11_orders_report_issue (write operation).

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 context implies use when you have an order ID and need details, but there is no explicit guidance on when to use this versus alternatives like rh11_orders_list. No exclusions or alternative references are provided.

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