list_manufacturing_orders

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden, but it only implies a read operation through the word 'list'. It says nothing about pagination via skip/count, whether includeCount is expensive, default sort order, or what is returned, all of which matter for a 12-parameter query tool.

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?

It is a single front-loaded phrase with no wasted words, which is good structurally. However, the brevity reads as under-specification rather than disciplined conciseness given the tool's complexity.

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 12-parameter list tool with no annotations and no output schema, the description is far too thin: filtering semantics, pagination, sorting defaults, and result shape are all unaddressed. An agent could call it, but not confidently or correctly in edge cases.

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 only 50%, and six parameters (skip, count, status, include, orderDateTo, orderDateFrom) carry no schema description at all. The description adds zero parameter detail, so it fails to compensate for the coverage gap; it cannot even clarify the enum semantics of status.

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 pair (search and list) plus the resource (manufacturing/work orders), which is clearly distinct from the singular get_manufacturing_order sibling. It does not, however, explicitly contrast itself with that sibling or explain what 'search' means versus listing.

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 is given: it never says to use this for browsing/collecting orders versus get_manufacturing_order for a single known order, nor does it describe prerequisites or pagination expectations. The agent must infer routing from the tool name alone.

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