humanitix_list_orders

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

With no annotations, the description must carry the full behavioral burden. It discloses a genuinely useful trait — trimmed orders by default vs full payloads with raw=true — but omits auth/permission requirements, rate limits, and pagination/truncation behavior (max_items defaults to 500), leaving meaningful behavioral gaps.

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?

Three compact sentences, front-loaded with purpose and scope, with no filler. The middle clause ('The event_id identifies the event') is mildly redundant with the opening sentence but not harmful.

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 7-parameter list tool with no annotations and no output schema, the description covers purpose, required-ID provenance, and the trimmed/raw return distinction, but never addresses pagination semantics, the 'since' filter, or the country-code override. Adequate but with clear gaps for correct invocation.

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 100%, so baseline is 3, and the description adds value by explaining the relationship between the two required IDs and the origin of event_date_id. It also reinforces the raw toggle, though it adds nothing about since, max_items, page_size, or override_location.

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') with a precise scope ('for a specific Humanitix event and event date'), so the agent immediately knows what is returned. It does not, however, contrast itself with siblings like humanitix_get_order or humanitix_list_tickets, so differentiation from the rest of the family is left implicit.

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 a real prerequisite: event_date_id 'can be obtained from humanitix_list_event_dates', which tells the agent how to sequence calls. There is no explicit when-not-to-use guidance or conditional routing to alternatives such as humanitix_get_order for a single order.

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