Draft Orders List

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

Annotations already declare readOnly, idempotent, non-destructive, openWorld. The description adds genuinely new context: the required OAuth scope (read_draft_orders), the API version, and the exact response envelope including pagination fields. That is real value beyond the annotations.

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?

Front-loaded with the action, then compact structured lines for endpoint, scope, version, and return shape. No filler, though the return-shape line is dense and could be slightly clearer.

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?

No output schema exists, but the description supplies the response envelope (count, page, per_page, has_more, next_page, items), which is exactly what an agent needs. Combined with full schema coverage, the definition is nearly complete; only filtering/usage context is missing.

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 description coverage is 100%, so page, per_page, fields, and response_format are fully documented in the schema. The description adds no parameter-level detail, so the baseline 3 applies.

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?

States a specific verb and resource ("List draft orders") that clearly distinguishes it from the get/create/update/delete/confirm siblings in the draft_orders family. It does not explicitly contrast with tiendanube_orders_list, but the resource noun 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 guidance on when to use this versus tiendanube_orders_list or tiendanube_draft_orders_get. The only context is the HTTP endpoint and required scope, which tells an agent how to call it but not when to prefer it.

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