ym_get_orders

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

Annotations already mark the tool as readOnly and openWorld, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds meaningful behavioral detail: pagination via page_token, page size limit <=50, date formats, status filter options, and the JSON response envelope.

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?

The description is well-structured with a one-line purpose, an Args list, a Returns line, and a pagination hint. Every sentence adds useful information; nothing is redundant or padded.

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 read-only list tool with an output schema, this is complete. It covers parameter detail, response shape, pagination, and cross-tool relationships to ym_get_campaigns and ym_fetch_all, giving an agent everything needed to call and iterate 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 0%, so the description carries full parameter documentation. It explains every parameter: campaign_id source, status values and comma-separation, date format for from_date/to_date, page_token meaning, and limit maximum.

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 orders of one shop' with the exact GET endpoint. It clearly scopes to a single campaign/shop via campaign_id and is easy to distinguish from sibling tools like ym_get_offers or ym_get_stocks.

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 helpful context such as campaign_id coming from ym_get_campaigns and explicitly routes pagination-heavy workflows to ym_fetch_all. However, it does not explicitly state when to choose this tool over alternatives like ym_get_orders vs ym_get_offers, or when not to use it.

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