Get order

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

Annotations already declare readOnly, idempotent and non-destructive, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds genuine context beyond them: the status enumeration (including terminal states like CANCELLED/EXPIRED/CLOSED) and the minor-units convention, which materially affects how an agent interprets returned amounts.

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?

Two sentences, front-loaded with the verb and resource before the field inventory. The long mid-sentence field enumeration is dense and arguably longer than needed, but every item listed is return-value information an agent would otherwise have to probe for.

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 output schema, the description carries the burden of describing return values, and it does so by naming the key fields and the amounts convention. What remains unstated are error/not-found behavior and whether nested lists (captures, refunds) are paginated or truncated.

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 in the schema, including the UUID format and the 'not the merchant order number' caveat. The description adds no further parameter meaning, so the baseline of 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?

Opens with a specific verb+resource ('Get a Klarna order') and immediately enumerates the data surfaced: status, amounts, order lines, captures, refunds, merchant references, addresses. It also pre-empts confusion with a sibling by explaining that refunds are listed here because there is no separate list-refunds endpoint.

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 closing sentence gives concrete routing guidance: use this tool to see refunds for an order since Klarna exposes no separate list-refunds endpoint, which steers the agent away from hunting for a dedicated sibling. It stops short of explicit when-not-to-use conditions (e.g. expired or not-found orders) or pointing at list_captures / get_payment_session as complements.

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