ls_list_order_items

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

Discloses pagination response structure (meta.page) and cross-store behavior with environment variable and API key scope. Annotations already mark read-only and idempotent; description adds valuable behavioral context without contradiction.

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 conveying purpose, filtering, pagination, and cross-store note. Front-loaded with core purpose, efficient and well-structured.

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 no output schema, the description adequately explains pagination response. Covers filtering, pagination, cross-store constraints. Could mention default sorting or pagination size, but overall complete for a simple list tool.

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% with clear descriptions. The description adds the context that filters are optional and cross-store requirements, but doesn't fundamentally extend parameter meaning beyond schema.

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 lists order items, with optional filtering by order or product. It distinguishes from sibling tools like ls_get_order_item and ls_list_orders.

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 mentions pagination and cross-store caveats, providing context for when filters are required. However, it doesn't explicitly state when not to use this tool over alternatives.

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