Get Grid Orders By IDs

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

The annotations already provide readOnlyHint: true and openWorldHint: true, so the description is not responsible for communicating read-only semantics. The description adds minimal additional behavioral context, but the annotations fully cover the safety profile. A slight mention of no side effects could be added but is redundant here.

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 a single, punchy sentence with zero fluff. It is perfectly sized for a simple fetch operation.

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 read-only fetch tool with one parameter, clear schema, and annotations, this description is fully adequate. The context signals (no nested objects, no enums, simple array parameter) simplify the need for elaboration. An output schema exists, so not detailing return values is not a gap.

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% with a helpful example ('e.g. ["123", "456"]') in the schema itself. The description's focus on 'their IDs' reinforces the purpose of the sole parameter. Since the schema does all the heavy lifting, the description adds adequate value, meeting the baseline for a single-parameter 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 'Fetch specific grid orders by their IDs' uses a specific verb ('Fetch') and names the resource ('grid orders') plus the scoping mechanism ('by their IDs'). This aligns perfectly with the tool name and clearly belongs to the grid order family of tools, distinguishing it from related siblings like 'grid_list' (which likely fetches all).

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 implies usage for fetching specific grid orders, and the tool's place in the grid family is clear from its name and siblings. However, it does not explicitly state when NOT to use it (e.g., for listing all orders) or name a specific alternative tool, missing an opportunity to fully distinguish from siblings like 'grid_list'.

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