traverse_customer_orders

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. It discloses the core traversal behavior and direction semantics but does not mention pagination, ordering, error handling, or explicit read-only guarantees. It is functional but lacks richer 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?

Two compact sentences cover purpose and direction logic with no redundancy. The most important information (link and direction) is front-loaded.

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?

For a simple traversal tool with no output schema, the description adequately explains inputs and expected results. It lacks details on result format or edge cases, but the core usage is well covered.

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 schema provides only types and an enum, but the description adds crucial meaning: pk's role depends on direction, and direction determines traversal direction. This significantly clarifies parameter usage beyond the schema.

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 the tool traverses the Customer → Order link 'customerOrders' (one-to-many), with explicit direction semantics. It distinguishes itself from sibling traversal tools by naming the specific relationship.

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?

Provides clear direction-specific instructions (which pk to pass and what objects are returned), effectively guiding when to use it. However, it does not explicitly mention alternatives or exclusions (e.g., when to prefer direct get/search tools over traversal).

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