Find Dicker Data orders by entering an account code, order number, backorder number, or customer PO to retrieve matching order details.
List Dicker Data orders matching an account code, order number, backorder number, or customer PO number.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| accountCode | No | ||
| orderNumber | No | ||
| backorderNumber | No | ||
| customerPONumber | No |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v0.1.0Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
No annotations are present, so the description must disclose behavior, but it only restates the query filters. It does not mention authentication, read-only behavior, result format, pagination, or the effect of providing no parameters.
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 efficient sentence that front-loads the action and resource, then lists the criteria. No filler 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?
With no annotations, no output schema, and four optional-looking parameters, the description leaves important invocation details unstated: whether a filter is required, whether multiple filters combine, and what the returned list contains. It is minimally usable but not 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?
Schema description coverage is 0%, so the description must supply parameter meaning. It does name all four filter fields and indicates they are matching keys, but it gives no detail about format, exact-match behavior, or whether at least one must be provided.
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 ('List') and resource ('Dicker Data orders') and enumerates four precise matching criteria. It clearly communicates the tool's scoped purpose, though it does not explicitly contrast with sibling tools like dickerdata_get_order_details.
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 this is for listing orders by various identifiers but gives no guidance on when to choose this tool over alternatives, such as dickerdata_get_order_details, or whether the filters are alternatives or required. An agent cannot tell from this text which sibling to call for a single order's full details.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.