cigchat_list_orders

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

The description discloses the HTTP method (GET) and the required token scope, which are useful behavioral traits beyond the schema. However, it does not mention pagination, response format, or any potential side effects. With no annotations, this leaves the agent needing to infer these details, so transparency is moderate.

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 a single sentence plus a requirement clause, with no filler. It is front-loaded with the core action and includes the endpoint and auth requirement efficiently.

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 lack of an output schema and the presence of optional pagination and filter parameters, the description is incomplete. It does not explain response structure, default pagination, or how the parameters affect results, making it insufficient for an agent to use effectively.

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 input schema provides descriptions for all three parameters (page, limit, user_ns), covering 100%. The description adds no extra meaning beyond the schema, so the baseline 3 is appropriate.

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 'Get list of orders' and includes the HTTP endpoint '[GET /shop/orders]', which uniquely identifies the resource. It is specific to orders, though it does not explicitly differentiate from sibling list tools, 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?

No when-to-use guidance is provided; it does not mention alternatives like shop_orders_get_info for single orders or explain how to filter or paginate. The only additional context is the required 'Manage Team' scope, which is a prerequisite rather than usage guidance.

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