Get order

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

Annotations already declare readOnly, idempotent, non-destructive, closed-world, so the safety bar is largely met structurally. The description adds value by revealing that the response includes derived state — allowed next statuses, refundable remainder, days late — which tells the agent this call is a decision substrate for writes. It does not mention error behavior for a missing order.

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?

One dense sentence enumerating the payload followed by a single imperative directive; the operational rule is front-loaded at the end with zero filler. Nothing repeats the name or title.

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 an output schema present the description need not explain return values, yet it still orients the agent on what matters. For a simple one-param read it is near-complete; only failure modes for an invalid or nonexistent order_id are unaddressed.

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% and the single order_id parameter is already documented with an example in the schema. The description adds no format, range, or lookup guidance beyond it, so the baseline 3 applies.

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 ('Full detail for one order') and immediately scopes it against the sibling list_orders by emphasizing a single order with full detail. The enumeration of what 'full detail' means (status, customer, line items, totals, refunds, invoice, delivery timing) removes any ambiguity about the payload.

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?

'Call this before any write on an order' gives a concrete precondition that ties it to update_order_status and issue_refund. It stops short of an explicit negative case (e.g. use list_orders to browse), so it is strong but not fully routing.

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