Fund Order Detail

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint and destructiveHint=false, so the safety profile is fully covered by structured data. The description contributes only 'Requires auth', which is genuinely additional but thin; nothing is said about return shape, error behavior for an unknown order_id, or account scoping.

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?

A single tight sentence with the action front-loaded and no wasted clauses. It is efficiently sized, though the brevity leaves it close to boilerplate rather than demonstrably earning every word.

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 single-parameter detail lookup with annotations covering the safety profile and no nested objects, this is nearly sufficient. The only real gap is that with no output schema, the description does not hint at what 'detail' contains, which an agent may want before calling.

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 description coverage is 100% – both order_id and the _jq filter are documented in the schema itself. The description merely restates order_id's source, adding no format, range, or validity detail beyond the schema, so the baseline 3 applies.

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 ('Get one fund order's detail') and identifies the lookup key (order_id) plus its origin (fund_orders). This implicitly distinguishes it from the sibling list tool fund_orders, but never names the sibling or contrasts explicitly, so it stops short of a 5.

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?

Usage is only implied: pointing at `fund_orders` as the source of order_id tells an agent the list tool feeds this one, and 'Requires auth' is a real prerequisite. There is no statement of when not to use it or of alternatives for related lookups (e.g. order_detail, fund_transactions).

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