list_store_order_lines

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

The description adds value beyond annotations by stating 'Authenticated via API key. Max 10 concurrent requests. Read-only, safe to retry.' This covers authentication, rate limits, and safety, which are not provided by the readOnlyHint annotation. No contradictions.

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 well-structured and front-loaded, but slightly verbose. The usage guidelines paragraph could be condensed without losing meaning. Still, it remains concise for the amount of information provided.

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 tool's complexity (5 params, 0% schema coverage) and the presence of an output schema, the description is complete. It covers authentication, concurrency, parameters comprehensively, and return format, ensuring an agent can use it correctly.

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?

With 0% schema description coverage, the description fully compensates by detailing each parameter: store_id (source), order_id (target), count (default/max), offset (pagination), and account (optional, reference to list_accounts). This provides clear semantics beyond the bare schema.

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 'List the line items of a single e-commerce order' with a specific verb and resource. It distinguishes from sibling tools like list_store_orders (lists orders, not lines) and get_store_order_line (single line) by focusing on listing multiple lines for an order.

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 explains when to use the tool ('review the individual products, quantities, and prices attached to an order') and provides context about manual vs. integrated stores. However, it does not explicitly state when not to use it or name alternative tools like get_store_order_line for single line retrieval.

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