get_orders

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must carry the burden of behavioral disclosure. It only says 'Get orders', implying a read operation, but does not disclose whether it is read-only, how results are ordered, whether pagination applies, or any other behavioral traits. This is minimal beyond the tool name.

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 a single sentence that is concise and front-loaded with the action 'Get' and the resource 'orders'. It contains no redundancy or filler words, making it highly efficient while still conveying the core purpose.

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?

This is a relatively simple list tool but the description is insufficient for full contextual completeness. There is no output schema, and the description does not mention return format, ordering, pagination, or the impact of date filters. It lacks the behavioral context that would help an agent understand the full scope of the operation.

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 description coverage is 100%, with all 4 parameters (limit, end_date, start_date, restaurant_name) individually documented. The description's mention of 'optional filtering' adds only a generic context and no specific parameter semantics, so the baseline score of 3 is appropriate given the schema already covers parameter meaning.

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 verb 'Get' and resource 'orders', and adds context with 'from persistent storage' and 'optional filtering'. However, it does not distinguish this tool from the sibling 'search_orders', which may also retrieve orders, so it lacks sibling differentiation.

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?

The description provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like 'search_orders' or 'sync_orders'. There is no mention of prerequisites, common use cases, or exclusions, leaving the agent without direction for selecting this tool.

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