Search order items

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

With no annotations, the description must disclose behavioral traits, but it only provides a name. It does not mention whether the operation is read-only, how results are return, pagination behavior, or any side effects. This is a complete transparency gap.

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 extremely short, but this is under-specification rather than conciseness. It lacks the substantive content that would justify its brevity, offering no usable information beyond a label.

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?

Given 5 parameters, no output schema, and no annotations, the description is grossly incomplete. It fails to explain what the tool returns, how inputs interrelate, or any behavioral expectations, making it nearly useless for an agent.

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%, and the description adds no parameter information. The five parameters (limit, end_date, date_type, start_date, progress_list) are entirely unexplained, leaving the agent without any semantic understanding of how to construct a valid request.

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 '購入商品API: searchOrderItem' is essentially a translated label of the tool name, providing only a generic verb ('search') and resource ('order items') without specifying what the search does, its scope, or how it differs from sibling tools like rms_search_orders or rms_get_order_items. It is barely more than a tautology.

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. With siblings rms_search_orders and rms_get_order_items, there is no differentiation or context to help an agent choose correctly.

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