Extract all serial numbers assigned to line items on a specific purchase order. Provide the purchase order ID to retrieve them for tracking or verification.
Extract serial numbers (serial numbers) from a specific purchase order. Returns all serial numbers assigned to line items on this order.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| purchaseOrderId | Yes | The purchase order ID |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v1.4.0-alpha.2Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It does disclose the read-only nature and return semantics ("Returns all serial numbers assigned to line items"), but says nothing about pagination, empty orders, ordering, or permissions, which is a modest gap for a simple lookup.
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 sentences with the core action front-loaded. The parenthetical "(serial numbers)" restating the noun is minor redundancy, but nothing else wastes space.
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 single-parameter read with no output schema, the description covers what the tool does and what it returns. It is nearly complete; only the absence of any disambiguation from serial-focused siblings keeps it from being fully sufficient.
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?
One parameter with 100% schema description coverage, so the schema already documents purchaseOrderId. The description confirms it targets a specific purchase order but adds no format, example, or constraint beyond that, matching the baseline for schema-covered 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?
States a specific verb ("Extract") and resource ("serial numbers from a specific purchase order") and clarifies scope as serials assigned to line items on that order. It is clear on its own, but it never differentiates itself from the many serial-related siblings (get_sales_order_serials, get_product_serials, list_serial_numbers, search_serial_number), which an agent must disambiguate against.
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 when-to-use guidance, no prerequisites, and no mention of alternatives. An agent gets no help deciding between this and get_sales_order_serials / get_product_serials / list_serial_numbers; only the resource implied by the name distinguishes it.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.