Discogs: get marketplace order

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

The readOnlyHint annotation already indicates a safe read operation. The description adds no behavioral context beyond 'fetch details,' such as what fields are returned, whether authentication is required, or error behavior. It provides no information beyond what the annotation already conveys.

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 sentence, no wasteful words, and front-loaded with the verb and resource. It is as concise as possible.

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?

The description is thin for a tool with no output schema. It doesn't describe the return value structure, potential errors, or prerequisites (e.g., having an order_id from list_orders). Given the simple one-parameter nature, a bit more explanation of what 'details' includes would improve completeness.

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?

With 0% schema description coverage, the description should compensate but doesn't. The order_id parameter is not explained; the agent must infer its meaning from the tool name. The description provides no additional meaning about the parameter's format, source, or usage.

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 'Fetch' and names the resource 'details for a single marketplace order,' clearly distinguishing it from list/update operations like discogs_list_orders and discogs_update_order. The 'single' qualifier differentiates from bulk-list siblings.

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?

No guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It does not mention that discogs_list_orders should be used to obtain order IDs first, nor does it state when not to use this tool. The intended context is only implied by sibling tool names.

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