list_orders

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

With no annotations, the description carries the behavioral disclosure burden. It surfaces meaningful traits: pagination via 'one page', the absence of an 'ALL' status value, and valid country-code restrictions. It does not describe response format or rate limits, but it covers the most relevant quirks for a read-only listing tool.

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?

Two terse sentences front-load the core behavior before diving into filter details. Every sentence provides useful information with no filler.

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 7-parameter tool with no schema descriptions, no annotations, and no output schema, the description is not fully self-contained. It documents the distinctive filters well but leaves date formats, token semantics, and valid status values unspecified.

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 0%, so the description must compensate. It adds real meaning for status and country by explaining comma-separated lists, the no-'ALL' behavior, and valid codes. However, size, token, shop_id, created_after, and created_before remain unexplained.

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 identifies the operation as retrieving one page of GET /orders, with a specific resource and pagination scope. It does not explicitly contrast itself with sibling order-related tools like get_order_items, but the resource is unambiguous.

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 gives useful filtering context: status/country are comma-separated, omitting status returns every status, and valid country codes are listed. However, it does not state when to prefer list_orders over alternatives or when not to use it.

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