Order details

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and openWorldHint=false, so safety is covered, but the description adds nothing beyond the annotations. It does not state that access is limited to the customer's own orders, what happens with an invalid or foreign order_id, or whether an expired session_key causes failure.

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?

One short, front-loaded sentence with no wasted words. It is efficient, though the elliptical fragment style leaves the action implicit rather than stating 'retrieve'.

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?

With no output schema, the description correctly names the returned content (items, prices, status), which is the most valuable thing it does. It is still thin for a tool in a crowded order-related family, leaving the order_id source and session requirements unexplained.

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 only 50%: session_key is documented as coming from foran_login, but order_id has no description anywhere. The description never mentions either parameter, so it does not compensate for the undocumented order_id (e.g., where the caller obtains it).

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 fragment 'Items, prices and status of one of the customer's orders' identifies the resource and roughly what is returned, so the purpose is inferable. But it is a noun phrase without a verb, and it does nothing to distinguish this from close siblings like foran_order_status, foran_track_order, and foran_my_orders, which all sound like order lookups.

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?

There is no guidance on when to use this versus foran_order_status, foran_track_order, or foran_my_orders, and no mention of prerequisites such as needing an authenticated session or where an order_id comes from. The agent must infer routing from the name alone.

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