get_order

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. 'Get' implies a read-only operation, but the description does not disclose error behavior (e.g., 404 if not found) or return format. It provides minimal but non-misleading 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?

The description is a single succinct sentence with no filler. Every word adds value, and it is immediately understandable.

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?

Given the simplicity of the tool (one required parameter, no output schema, no complex behavior), the description adequately covers what it does. It does not explain the return value, but 'get' implies returning the order object, which is acceptable for a basic lookup.

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 100% coverage for the id parameter, with a generic 'resource id' description. The tool description's 'by id' adds a small semantic that this id identifies the order, but it does not significantly expand on the schema. Baseline of 3 is appropriate.

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 uses a specific verb ('Get'), a clear resource ('order'), and a unique identifier ('by id'). This clearly distinguishes it from list_orders, which retrieves multiple orders. The intent is unambiguous.

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 indicates use when retrieving a single order by its id. It does not explicitly mention alternatives, but the presence of list_orders in the sibling tools implies this tool is for individual lookups. This is clear context, though not exhaustive.

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