list_open_orders

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

The description adds important behavioral details beyond the readOnlyHint annotation: a 200-order limit, exclusion of customer card data, and the fixed open-state filter. These are significant for an agent to understand the tool's constraints and privacy implications, going well beyond the structured annotations.

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 highly concise, with just two sentences. The first sentence front-loads the core behavior, and the second provides critical caveats (no date filter, card data exclusion, read-only). Every word contributes value, with no fluff or redundancy.

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?

Given the tool has no parameters and an output schema is present, the description sufficiently covers the essential context: what is returned, the 200-limit, and the privacy guarantee. It is complete and unambiguous, allowing an agent to select and invoke the tool correctly without further information.

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 tool has zero parameters, and the description effectively explains the empty schema by stating 'no date filter, state=open only.' This clarifies why no parameters are needed, meeting the baseline for no-parameter tools with a small added explanation.

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's purpose: returning all currently open orders for the merchant, limited to 200. It also distinguishes itself from sibling tools by explicitly noting it is a convenience wrapper with no date filter and state=open only, which differentiates it from the more general list_orders.

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 provides clear usage context: it is for fetching open orders without date filters, and the 'state=open only' note implies using this when you need only open orders. However, it does not explicitly name an alternative tool for different states or filters, so it stops short of full guidance.

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