Order statistics

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

With no annotations provided, the description must fully disclose behavioral traits. It mentions cursor pagination and compact statistics but omits critical details such as the read-only nature, rate limits, handling of pagination responses, or what happens with large histories. This is insufficient for an agent to anticipate side effects or constraints.

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 extremely concise at two sentences with no redundant information. The first sentence front-loads the core action and result, making it efficient for quick comprehension.

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 involves pagination and statistics, the description lacks output schema guidance, parameter explanations, and behavioral details. It does not specify the format or structure of the returned statistics, leaving the agent uncertain about the output. Without annotations or additional context, it is incomplete for safe and correct invocation.

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% and the description does not explain the parameters 'max_pages' or 'page_delay_ms'. An agent cannot infer what values to use (e.g., page_delay_ms in milliseconds? how max_pages affects results?) from the description alone, leaving a critical gap.

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 'Walk full order-history cursor pagination and return compact card-only statistics' clearly identifies the action (paginate and return statistics), the resource (order history), and the output type (compact card-only statistics). It distinguishes from siblings like glovo_get_order_items which provide detail enrichment.

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 explicitly states that 'Detail enrichment is intentionally separate,' guiding users to use other tools for detailed item information. However, it does not list alternative tool names or specify when not to use this tool beyond that hint.

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