Retrieves the harvest and change history of an order, enabling audit of modifications.
Get an Order's harvest and change history
This tool declares no required parameters. Add optional parameters from the input schema as needed.
{
"id": 1,
"jsonrpc": "2.0",
"method": "tools/call",
"params": {
"arguments": {},
"name": "GetOrderHistoryV3"
}
}| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
No arguments | |||
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v1.0.0Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. It indicates read-only behavior (get history) but does not specify idempotency, response structure, or prerequisites. For a no-parameter tool, this is adequate but lacks depth.
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 concise at one sentence with no wasted words. However, it lacks structure or additional context that could be helpful. It earns a 4 for being brief and clear.
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 zero parameters and no output schema, the description is minimally complete. It explains the tool's purpose but does not describe the output or any contextual details like how the order is identified.
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?
There are no parameters, so the description only needs to convey the tool's purpose. The description adds meaning by specifying 'harvest and change history', which is sufficient for a parameterless tool.
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 'Get an Order's harvest and change history', specifying the verb 'Get', resource 'Order's harvest and change history', and distinguishes from siblings like GetOrderV3 and HarvestOrderV3.
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 provided on when to use this tool vs alternatives such as GetOrderHistory, GetOrderChangeReportingV3, or HarvestOrderV3. The description implies a use case but does not explicitly state context or exclusions.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.