vtex_get_order

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 states it's a read operation ('Get'), implying non-destructive behavior, but doesn't mention any behavioral traits such as error handling (e.g., what happens if the order ID is invalid), authentication requirements, rate limits, or response format. This leaves significant gaps for a tool that likely interacts with a critical system like orders.

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 extremely concise with a single sentence 'Get order details by ID', which is front-loaded and wastes no words. Every part of the sentence is essential, making it efficient and easy to parse.

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 complexity of order systems and the lack of annotations and output schema, the description is incomplete. It doesn't explain what 'details' include, error conditions, or response structure, which are crucial for an agent to use this tool effectively in a real-world context like e-commerce.

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 description adds no parameter semantics beyond what the input schema provides. Since schema description coverage is 100% (the 'orderId' parameter is documented as 'Order ID'), the baseline score of 3 applies. The description doesn't clarify the format of the order ID or any constraints, so it doesn't add value over the schema.

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 'Get order details by ID' clearly states the verb ('Get') and resource ('order details'), but it's somewhat vague about what 'details' includes. It distinguishes from obvious siblings like 'vtex_cancel_order' or 'vtex_list_orders' by focusing on retrieval of a specific order, but doesn't explicitly differentiate from other getters like 'vtex_get_product' beyond the resource type.

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 versus alternatives. For example, it doesn't mention using 'vtex_list_orders' for browsing orders or 'vtex_get_order' for specific ID-based retrieval, nor does it cover prerequisites like authentication or order existence.

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