Get title

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and destructiveHint=false, so the safety profile is covered; the description earns credit by adding the required scope ('Requires services:read when called with an API key') and the 'customer-visible' visibility nuance, both of which are absent from the structured fields.

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 short, front-loaded sentences with no filler. The missing punctuation between 'title' and 'Requires' makes it read as a slight run-on but costs little.

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 should hint at the return value; it only implies a title string via 'display title' without stating the return format or whether it can be empty. For a trivial single-param getter with annotations and full schema coverage this is adequate but not 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?

Schema description coverage is 100% and orderNo is documented thoroughly (pattern, length, examples), so the schema does the heavy lifting. The description adds no further meaning about the parameter, making the baseline 3 appropriate.

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?

States a specific verb+resource: reading the current customer-visible service display title. The 'get' vs 'change_title' sibling contrast is inferable from the verb, though the description never names the sibling explicitly.

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 statement of when to use this tool versus alternatives such as change_title, nor any prerequisites beyond the auth note. Usage is only implied by the word 'Get'.

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