List orders

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

Annotations already declare readOnly/idempotent/non-destructive, so 'Read-only' is redundant, but the description adds real behavioral context beyond them: newest-first ordering and, critically, that pagination is by order while rows are per order item. It does not mention rate limits or auth scope, keeping it short of a 5.

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?

Roughly three compact clauses with zero filler; the read-only signal and the scope/ordering facts are front-loaded, and every phrase (grain, fields, pagination unit) carries information.

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?

With no output schema, the description usefully characterizes the returned row (price, quantity, sale fee) and the pagination model, which is what an agent needs to page correctly. It stops short of stating whether there is a total count or end-of-results signal.

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%, so the baseline is 3; the description earns extra credit by tying limit/offset to the order-level pagination unit while clarifying that each returned row is an order item, resolving a potential mismatch between page size and row count.

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 ('List the seller's orders') plus scope ('last N days'), ordering ('newest first'), and result grain ('one row per order item'). The resource is clearly distinct from siblings like ml_list_items and ml_list_questions, so an agent can route without opening the schema.

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 implied by the list-plus-time-window framing, and the pagination note hints at how to page through results. However, there is no explicit when-to-use/when-not guidance and no named alternative (e.g., a search or single-order retrieval tool) to disambiguate against.

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