alopeyk_get_order

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

No annotations are provided, so description carries the full burden. It appropriately declares read-only behavior, authentication requirement, and the rich columns set returned. However, it does not disclose error handling or rate limits.

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?

Description is concise, starting with a clear purpose, followed by useful auxiliary information (Persian, endpoint mapping), and structured with an 'Args:' section. Every sentence adds value without redundancy.

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 an output schema exists, full return value details are not needed. The description covers purpose, parameters, authentication, and the rich columns set. It is adequate but could mention when to fetch instead of list or search.

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 compensates well by explicitly listing both parameters (order_id and instance) with clear explanations, including data type and default value for instance.

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?

Description clearly states 'Get one order with rich columns' and includes Persian purpose and endpoint mapping, making the tool's action and scope unambiguous. It effectively distinguishes from sibling tools like alopeyk_cancel_order or alopeyk_create_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?

Description mentions read-only and requires access_token, but does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives like aget_address. Usage context is implied but not fully detailed with exclusions.

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