search_all_orders

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

The description discloses the key behavioral trait of fetching all pages in parallel. It warns to always use filters, implying performance concerns if not used. However, it does not elaborate on potential impacts like latency, resource usage, or any rate limiting. No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden but remains somewhat vague.

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 very short (two sentences plus a note) and front-loaded with the primary action. Every sentence adds value, with no redundant or extraneous content.

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?

Given the tool has 6 parameters with no schema descriptions and no annotations, the description is insufficient. It does not clarify parameter semantics, return format (despite having an output schema), or potential risks if filters are omitted. The parallel fetch behavior is noted but not fully contextualized with advice on how to use it safely.

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 0% with no parameter descriptions in the schema. The description only generically mentions 'filters' and gives a date-based example, but does not explain the six parameters (q, status, shop_id, warehouse_id, start_create_date, end_create_date) or their allowed values/format. The description fails to compensate for the lack of schema descriptions.

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 clearly states the tool fetches all orders across all pages in parallel, with specific verb and resource. It distinguishes from sibling tools like list_orders (likely paginated) and other search_all_* tools.

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 gives explicit use cases ('use for reporting/counting') and a concrete example ('all orders from last week'). It also emphasizes using filters to narrow results. However, it does not explicitly state when to avoid this tool or mention direct alternatives like list_orders for single-page queries.

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