cdek_get_order_by_im_number

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full responsibility. It discloses the HTTP method (GET), hinting at read-only behavior, but lacks details on authentication, error handling, rate limits, or what happens if the order is not found. Minimal behavioral context.

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 relatively concise, with a one-sentence purpose and a clear Args line. However, there is some duplication between Russian and English text that could be streamlined. The structure is logical.

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 (not shown), return values are presumably documented. The description covers the tool's primary function and parameter meaning, but lacks behavioral transparency (errors, edge cases) and usage guidance, leaving gaps for an agent.

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?

Although the input schema has 0% description coverage (no description field in schema), the description compensates by explaining that im_number is 'Order number in client's system'. This adds crucial meaning beyond the schema's type-only definition.

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 gets order information by IM number (client's system order number), using the specific verb 'получение' (get) and resource 'заказ' (order). It distinguishes from sibling tools like cdek_get_order by specifying the identifier type.

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 implies usage for retrieving orders by client system number, but does not explicitly state when to prefer this over alternatives like cdek_get_order (which likely uses CDEK's internal order number). No exclusion criteria or when-not-to-use guidance is provided.

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