hl_order_status_by_oid

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. It implies a read-only query ('order status') but does not explicitly state safety, permissions, or potential errors. The mention of 'orderStatus' adds a field-level hint, but there is no disclosure of behavior beyond the basic purpose.

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, concise phrase with no redundant words. It is front-loaded with the core action and immediately states the key identifier type, making it 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?

The tool is simple and an output schema exists, so return values need not be described. However, the description lacks context about the 'user' parameter and does not reference its sibling tool for alternative lookup by cloid, making it barely adequate for independent use.

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 0%, so the description must compensate. It clarifies that 'oid' is a numeric order id, but the 'user' parameter is left entirely unexplained. This partial coverage leaves ambiguity, especially since both parameters are required.

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 action (retrieving order status) and the resource (order by numeric order id). It effectively distinguishes from the sibling tool hl_order_status_by_cloid by specifying 'numeric order id', which tells the agent exactly which identifier type to use.

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 like hl_order_status_by_cloid. The description does not mention any conditions or exclusions, leaving the agent to infer usage from the name alone.

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