list_orders

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It only says 'List orders' and does not state that the operation is read-only, whether authentication is required, or any rate limits or side effects. The absence of such details leaves the agent without critical safety information.

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 efficient sentence, 'List orders with pagination, search and filters.' It is concise and front-loaded, with no wasted words. It does not, however, include any additional useful structure or context, but it is appropriately sized for a simple list operation.

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?

The description is incomprehensive for a tool with 6 parameters, a nested filters object, and no output schema or annotations. It fails to mention how pagination behaves (e.g., default page size), what 'filters' entails (pass-through verbatim), or any return value details. The agent would need to rely entirely on the schema, which is a significant gap for operational context.

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%, meaning every parameter already has a description. The tool description adds no new semantic value beyond what the schema provides; it merely summarizes pagination, search, and filters at a high level. This meets the baseline but does not exceed it.

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 tool lists orders, which is a specific verb+resource. It mentions pagination, search, and filters, providing a basic scope. However, it does not explicitly differentiate from sibling list tools like list_products or list_customers beyond the resource name.

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?

No guidance is given about when to use this tool versus alternatives. For example, it does not mention using get_order for a single order or clarify that this is the appropriate tool for bulk listing. The description is purely declarative with no context or exclusions.

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