Get Order Tax Breakdown

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true, and destructiveHint=false, covering the safety profile. The description adds valuable context that the data is persisted and not recalculated, which goes beyond annotations and clarifies the nature of the read.

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 plus a brief note, with the primary action stated first and the clarifying constraint (no recalculation) immediately after. Every word earns its place; no filler or repetition.

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 rich annotations, a 100%-described schema, and an output schema handling return values, the description covers the essential behavior. It could mention preconditions like connection profile requirements, but those are handled by other tools and the schema. Minor gap only.

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% for all three parameters, so the schema already documents them thoroughly. The description only repeats that the lookup is by increment_id, adding no new meaning beyond what the schema provides. Baseline 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 states a specific verb (Returns), a clear resource (tax rates and amounts on an order), and the identifier (increment_id). It also clarifies what it does NOT do (recalculate tax), which distinguishes it from calculation tools and it clearly differs from sibling find_order_by_increment_id.

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 clarifies scope by stating it reads persisted sales_order_tax rows and does not recalculate, but it never explicitly names an alternative or says when to prefer this over other order-related tools. Usage timing is implied rather than directed.

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