Get Order

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

With no annotations, the description carries the transparency burden. The verb 'get' clearly conveys read-only retrieval, but the description does not state behavioral details such as scope, prerequisites, identifiers, or likely error cases.

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 short, clear, and front-loaded. It avoids filler and redundant phrasing while still stating the core purpose.

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 benefits from full schema descriptions and an output schema. However, the description is still minimal and leaves surrounding tool-selection ambiguity unresolved.

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%. The parameters are already described as 'Order ID to retrieve' and 'App package name,' so the description adds no extra parameter-level meaning. The baseline of 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?

The description is a clear, factual one-liner: 'Get detailed order/transaction information.' It identifies the action and resource, but it does not explicitly distinguish get_order from related siblings like get_external_transaction, get_product_purchase, or list_voided_purchases.

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 when-to-use guidance is provided. The description does not mention applicable contexts, alternatives, exclusions, or how get_order compares with batch_get_orders, get_external_transaction, or refund_order.

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