get_order
Look up an order using its unique identifier to view order details such as status, amount, and items.
Instructions
Retrieve a single Merchant order by its id.
Input Schema
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| order_id | Yes |
Look up an order using its unique identifier to view order details such as status, amount, and items.
Retrieve a single Merchant order by its id.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| order_id | Yes |
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It only states 'Retrieve a single Merchant order', which is minimal. No mention of side effects, authentication requirements, rate limits, or expected response traits. For a simple read operation this is acceptable but still lacking.
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 extraneous words. It is front-loaded with the core action and resource. Every word is necessary and contributes to understanding.
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 no output schema, the description does not mention what the tool returns (e.g., the full order object). Also lacks any behavioral notes. For a simple retrieval tool with one parameter, it is partially complete but missing critical return value 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?
Schema coverage is 0%, meaning the description adds no information about the `order_id` parameter beyond what the schema provides (name and type). The parameter name 'order_id' is self-explanatory, but the description should clarify its format or source. This is a major gap as the agent has no additional context.
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 a specific verb 'Retrieve' and identifies the resource as a 'single Merchant order by its id'. It clearly distinguishes from sibling tools like list_orders (which returns multiple) and get_customer/get_plan/get_subscription (different entities).
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 implies usage when you have an order ID and need a single order, but provides no explicit guidance on when to use this vs alternatives, no when-not conditions, and no prerequisites. The usage context is clear but not elaborated.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
We provide all the information about MCP servers via our MCP API.
curl -X GET 'https://glama.ai/api/mcp/v1/servers/Sherman-Studio/revolut-merchant-mcp'
If you have feedback or need assistance with the MCP directory API, please join our Discord server