list_orders

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the behavioral burden. It discloses that the call is paginated and filterable, and 'list' implies a read operation. However, it does not describe sort order, result shape, whether filters are combined with AND/OR, or any authentication/rate-limit constraints.

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 front-loaded sentence that covers the verb, resource, scope, filtering options, and pagination behavior with no filler or redundant schema information. 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?

The description is adequate for a simple list call because all parameters are optional and the workspace scope plus filters are stated. However, with no output schema and no annotations, it omits the return shape, default/sort behavior, and any permission prerequisites, leaving the agent with reasonable but incomplete 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?

Schema description coverage is only 22%, but the description compensates by naming the filter categories: payment/fulfillment status, customer, pipeline stage, search string, and date range, plus pagination. This maps clearly to most parameters, though skip/limit semantics and exact identifier formats are still left to inference.

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 begins with a specific verb and resource, 'List orders in the workspace,' and clearly enumerates the filtering dimensions, making the tool's purpose evident. It is easy to distinguish from order-mutation tools like create_manual_order or cancel_order, though it does not explicitly differentiate itself from generic list tools such as list_records.

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 filter list implies when the tool is useful for listing or searching orders, but the description never states when to prefer a sibling like get_order for a single order or when not to use this tool. The workspace scope provides context, but no alternatives or exclusions are mentioned.

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