search_orders

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It mentions 'Returns paginated results' and the endpoint, which adds some transparency. However, it does not disclose whether the operation is read-only, authorization requirements, or how multiple filters interact, leaving gaps for an agent.

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 two sentences long, with the main purpose front-loaded and no redundant information. Each sentence serves a purpose: clarifying search criteria and explaining endpoint behavior and output pagination.

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 moderately complex with four optional parameters and no output schema. The description covers the searchable fields and pagination, but omits important context such as how multiple filters are combined (AND/OR), whether partial matches are supported, and the absence of an explicit read-only guarantee. This is adequate but not comprehensive.

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?

The input schema provides detailed descriptions for all four parameters, giving 100% coverage. The description only restates the search fields (name, email, phone) without adding new meaning beyond the schema, so the baseline score of 3 is appropriate.

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 tool searches orders by name, email, or phone, which is a specific verb-resource combination. It distinguishes itself from list_orders (listing all) and get_order (fetching a single order) by explicitly naming the searchable fields.

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?

The description implies usage by framing it as a search tool with filter parameters, but it does not explicitly state when to use it versus alternatives or provide exclusions. The phrase 'Uses filter params on the orders list endpoint' gives context but no direct 'use when' guidance.

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