get_orders

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

With no annotations the description carries the full burden, and it delivers: it discloses the 'Requires authentication' prerequisite, the default sort order, pagination via limit/offset, and the shape of each returned order. It does not mention rate limits or explicitly characterise the operation as read-only (only implied by 'List'), so it falls short of exhaustive.

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 core action and scope, then usage, then parameter detail, then return shape and auth. Every sentence carries information the schema does not, and there is no filler or repetition.

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?

There is no output schema and no annotations, yet the description covers return fields (id, date, status, total, currency, buyer, line items), pagination, sort order and auth. An agent has everything needed to call and interpret the result correctly.

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 100%, so the baseline is 3, but the description adds value by enumerating two status values absent from the schema ('payment_required', 'payment_in_process') and by restating pagination semantics. The role of status as an optional filter is also made explicit.

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 the authenticated seller's orders (sales)'), plus the ordering (newest first). The '(sales)' gloss and the authenticated-seller scope separate it cleanly from siblings like get_shipment, get_order_messages and get_returns without needing to open a schema.

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?

'Use this for questions about recent sales, revenue, or what a specific buyer purchased' gives concrete invocation contexts. It does not name an alternative tool or state when NOT to use it, so it stops short of the top band, but the positive guidance is clear.

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