Info Order

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden for behavioral disclosure. The verb 'Fetch' clearly suggests a read-only operation, which is helpful, but the description does not disclose any other behavioral traits such as error handling, authentication requirements, or rate limits. It adds minimal context beyond the action itself.

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, focused sentence that immediately states the action and target. It contains no extraneous words and is well-structured for quick parsing, making it an excellent example of conciseness.

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 tool with one parameter and no output schema, the description is largely sufficient. It covers the primary purpose and implies the nature of the order. However, it does not describe any return value structure or edge cases, though the absence of an output schema means the description does not need to detail returns. A short note on expected output could make it fully complete.

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 lists a single required parameter, order_id, with no description. The tool description says 'previously submitted order,' which implies that order_id refers to an existing order, but it does not explicitly explain the parameter's format, origin, or any additional semantics. With 0% schema description coverage, the description only partially compensates by indicating the order's life-cycle stage.

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 the specific verb 'Fetch' and clearly identifies the resource as 'status and details of a previously submitted order,' distinguishing it from sibling tools like info_domain or info_contact which target different resources. It leaves no ambiguity about the tool's purpose.

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 phrase 'previously submitted order' implies that this tool is for retrieving existing orders, not creating new ones, but the description does not provide explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives, and no alternatives are named. Usage context is only implied, not articulated.

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