get_order

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

readOnlyHint already declares this is a safe read operation. The description adds the required 'servers:read' scope and enumerates possible progress states, which is useful context, but it does not cover polling behavior or the full return shape.

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?

It is very short and front-loaded, with no wasted words. The sentence-fragment style is slightly loose, but the brevity suits a simple getter.

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 read-only getter with no output schema, the description supplies the key return values (progress states and item id) and auth scope. It could mention other order fields, but it is adequate for this tool.

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%, and the single order_id parameter is documented as returned by create_server or databases_create. The description adds no parameter details beyond what the schema already provides, 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?

The description names the resource (an order) and its progress states, but uses a noun-phrase fragment with no explicit verb such as 'retrieve'. An agent can infer it fetches order status, yet the intended action is implicit rather than stated.

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 list_servers, get_server, or the create tools that produce order ids. The schema mentions create_server and databases_create, but the description itself gives no usage context or exclusions.

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