Get an order

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, openWorldHint and destructiveHint=false, so safety is covered. The description adds genuinely new behavioral context: the result contains customer PII (name, phone, address) and there is an expectation not to echo it unprompted — a data-handling constraint the agent could not infer from annotations or schema.

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?

Two sentences, zero filler. The return-content summary is front-loaded and the PII caveat follows immediately; every clause 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 enumerates the returned sections (status, payment, receipt draft, delivery) and flags the PII, which is what an agent most needs to know before calling. It is slightly thin on lookup behavior — e.g. what happens if the order is not found, or how whole_organization affects visibility — but nothing essential is missing for correct invocation.

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% and the order_id description already explains the UUID source (list_orders field "id") and whole_organization explains its own semantics. The description adds no parameter-level meaning, so 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?

States a specific verb and resource ("Returns one order") and enumerates what the payload contains: status, payment, receipt draft, delivery details. The singular "one order" implicitly distinguishes it from list_orders, but no sibling is named explicitly.

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 only implied: fetching a single order by id is the obvious reading, and the PII instruction ("do not repeat it unless the user asks") gives downstream handling guidance. There is no explicit statement of when to prefer this over search_receipts or get_receipt, nor any prerequisite for the order_id.

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