get_order_by_id

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

There are no annotations provided, so the description carries the full burden. The verb 'retrieves' indicates a read-only operation, which is a clear behavioral signal. While it doesn't mention potential error conditions or response details, those are adequately covered by the output schema, and for a simple retrieval this is satisfactory.

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 a single sentence with no wasted words, front-loading the core purpose of retrieving an order by ID. It is appropriately sized for the tool's simplicity.

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?

For a simple single-order retrieval, the description combined with the input schema (which covers parameters fully) and the output schema (which defines return values) is complete enough. No critical information is missing for an agent to invoke the tool correctly.

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 schema already documents both parameters with 100% coverage, including a clear description for the nested parameter. The description adds no new meaning beyond confirming the lookup is by order_id, so it stays at the baseline.

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 uses a specific verb 'retrieves' and identifies the resource as 'a single order', with the scope 'by its ID'. This clearly distinguishes it from sibling tools like get_orders (plural) and get_order_by_client_id, which use a different lookup key.

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 implies the tool should be used when the caller has an order ID, but it does not explicitly state when to use it instead of alternatives like get_order_by_client_id or get_orders. No exclusions or alternative suggestions are provided.

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