get_order_history

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint and openWorldHint, so the safe-read nature is covered. The description adds meaningful behavioral context: addresses are redacted, returns include delivery window, and pagination semantics are explained, which goes beyond the structured annotations.

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 compact and well-structured with labeled Args and Returns sections. No redundant content; every sentence adds practical information.

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 list endpoint with a simple schema and an output schema, the description covers ordering, pagination, redaction, and returned key fields. It also provides guidance for the natural next step (get_order_details), making it contextually complete.

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?

Despite 0% schema description coverage, the description fully explains both parameters: skip as number to skip and take as count with a range constraint (1-50). This is essential semantic detail that the schema's type/default fields do not convey.

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?

Clearly identifies the tool as listing previous orders in reverse chronological order. The verb 'List' and resource 'orders' are specific, and the description distinguishes it from get_order_details by implying this is the overview tool.

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 explicitly directs users to use the returned Id with get_order_details, indicating when to chain to the detail tool. However, it does not enumerate situations where this tool should be avoided or alternatives for filtering/searching, though sibling tools are mostly product-focused.

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