ls_list_orders

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

The description adds value beyond annotations by disclosing pagination behavior and the response structure (meta.page with currentPage, lastPage, total). Annotations already declare readOnlyHint true, ensuring the agent knows it's safe.

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, no wasted words. The first sentence states the core purpose and filters, the second explains pagination. Perfectly front-loaded and efficient.

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?

The description covers purpose, filters, and pagination. While no output schema exists, it hints at the response structure. It does not explicitly state that the response contains order objects, but 'list orders' implies it. For a simple listing tool, this is mostly 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 input schema has 100% description coverage with detailed field descriptions (e.g., storeId, userEmail, include, pageNumber, pageSize). The description adds no extra semantics beyond mentioning the filters, so it meets the baseline for well-documented params.

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 explicitly states 'List all orders' with optional filters by store or user email, clearly identifying the verb and resource. It differentiates from sibling tools like ls_get_order (single order) and ls_list_order_items by its scope.

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 clearly indicates when to use this tool (listing orders) and mentions optional filters, but it does not explicitly state when not to use it or name specific alternatives like ls_get_order for a single order. The guidance is implicit rather than explicit.

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