list_account_orders

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

Annotations already provide readOnlyHint=true, so the description adds value by describing the return structure (JSON with orders array and total_items) and pagination behavior. However, it does not mention authorization requirements or rate limits, which are not covered by annotations.

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 concise, uses bullet points with Args and Returns sections, and front-loads the purpose. Every sentence adds value without 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?

Given the output schema exists and annotations are provided, the description covers the tool's purpose, usage guidance, and most parameters. The missing description of the 'account' parameter is a gap, but overall it is sufficiently complete for a listing tool.

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 coverage is 0%, so the description must compensate. It explains count (max 1000, default 10) and offset (default 0) clearly, but fails to describe the 'account' parameter present in the schema. This omission means not all parameters are semantically covered.

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 clearly states it lists e-commerce orders across all stores in the account. It uses a specific verb-resource pair and distinguishes itself from the sibling tool list_store_orders by specifying account-wide vs single store scope.

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?

Explicitly says when to use: for account-wide reporting without iterating store by store. Also directs to list_store_orders for single store scope. Mentions manual vs automated integration contexts, providing clear guidance on alternatives.

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