Get Order

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It conveys read-only intent by the word 'Get', but does not state side effects, authorization needs, error behavior, or that it does not mutate the order.

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 definition is short and front-loaded with its core purpose. The usage example is compact and useful, though the parenthetical 'or wherever the order lives' is vague and could be more explicit.

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 that an output schema exists and the operation is nominally a simple getter, the definition is minimally adequate. However, it lacks usage-context information, especially whether to use search_orders when the order ID is unknown, and it does not specify how the site_id should be resolved.

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?

The description only gives a loose example mapping an order ID to site_id="MLA", and does not explain required order_id semantics or the optional account parameter. With schema description coverage listed at 0%, the description does very little to help an agent understand the parameters.

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 states a specific operation: it gets detailed information about a single order. It is clearly different from listing or searching, but it does not explicitly differentiate itself from sibling tools like search_orders, so it lacks the explicit sibling contrast that would earn a 5.

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 a usage example but no guidance about when to choose get_order over search_orders or other order-related tools. There is no when-to-use, when-not-to-use, prerequisites, or fallback guidance.

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