eb_org_orders

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

readOnlyHint annotation already declares this a read operation, and the description's 'List' is consistent. It adds the cross-event scope (organizer's events) but does not mention pagination behavior or required organizer permissions beyond what schema/annotation provide.

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?

Single clear sentence, front-loaded verb and object, no filler. Every word earns its place.

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 list tool with annotations and complete schema, the description identifies the resource and scope. It lacks an explicit note on pagination or response shape, but the continuation parameter and readOnly hint cover much of the context.

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?

Input schema covers 100% of parameters with descriptions for org_id and continuation, so the description need not repeat them. It adds no additional parameter context, which is acceptable given schema coverage.

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?

Description clearly states the tool lists orders across an organization's events with an 'organizer side' qualifier, distinguishing it from personal orders (eb_my_orders) and event-specific orders (eb_event_orders).

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 explicit guidance on when to prefer this over eb_event_orders or eb_my_orders, but the phrase 'organizer side' implies a business context. It leaves the agent to infer the distinction from sibling names.

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