list_orders

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the burden. It discloses that the tool returns 'recent' orders and specifies the data fields included, implying a read-only operation. It does not mention pagination or rate limits, but the schema covers limit, and the 'list' verb strongly implies non-destructive behavior.

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 two sentences, front-loaded with the primary purpose, and includes only essential detail. The parameter usage guidance is concise and directly actionable, with no fluff or redundancy.

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 no output schema, the description adequately covers purpose, scope ('recent'), returned fields, and type differentiation. It relies on the schema for parameter details, which is acceptable given 100% coverage. Minor gaps like exact recency window are not critical.

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 100%, so the baseline is 3. The description reinforces the meaning of the 'type' parameter and clarifies its semantics, but does not add new information beyond what the schema already provides for limit and 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?

The description uses a specific verb 'list' and clearly identifies the resource 'purchase orders or sales orders from VNDLY'. It names the included fields (supplier/customer names, totals, status), distinguishing it from sibling tools like search_products and get_low_stock_alerts.

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 provides clear context for when to use the tool (listing order types) and gives explicit guidance on using the type parameter for purchase vs sales orders. However, it does not explicitly discuss alternatives or when-not-to-use, so it falls short of a 5.

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