List orders across Shopify stores with search filters and cursor pagination for efficient retrieval.
List orders with Shopify search filters and cursor pagination.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| after | No | ||
| first | No | ||
| query | No | ||
| store | Yes |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v1.6.0Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, and non-destructive behavior. The description adds valuable behavioral context by disclosing that the API uses cursor pagination and accepts Shopify search-filter syntax, which are not present in the annotations or schema.
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?
A single sentence with no filler: the verb, resource, and two structuring concepts are immediately clear. The key distinctions (search filters, cursor pagination) are front-loaded in the sentence.
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 tool is simple and annotations cover safety, so a short description is partially sufficient. However, with no output schema and no parameter documentation, the description doesn't mention return behavior, sorting/limits beyond the schema, or how this list relates to sibling list/get/order-summary tools, leaving moderate inferential gaps.
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 compensate; it only hints that 'query' is a Shopify search filter and that 'after'/'first' relate to cursor pagination. It does not explain the required 'store' parameter, the default/maximum page size, or the shape of the query syntax, leaving most of the burden on the schema's bare property names.
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 states a clear action ('List') on a specific resource ('orders') and adds two distinguishing capabilities: Shopify search filters and cursor pagination. It doesn't explicitly contrast with siblings like shopify_list_unfulfilled_orders or shopify_get_order, but the resource and modifiers make its basic purpose unambiguous.
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?
No usage context or alternative routing is provided; it never mentions when to choose this tool over shopify_list_unfulfilled_orders, shopify_get_order, or shopify_order_summary. The phrase 'Shopify search filters and cursor pagination' hints at capabilities, but does not state conditions or exclusions.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.