get_order

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It mentions 'complete order information' and lists categories, implying a read-only lookup, but does not disclose potential side effects, authentication requirements, rate limits, or behavior for invalid order numbers. It is adequate but not rich.

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 short sentences, front-loaded with the core action, and every piece adds value. It could arguably be a single sentence, but it is well-structured and avoids redundancy. Minor reduction possible but not necessary.

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 the output schema exists (so return format is covered), one required parameter, no nested objects, and clear sibling names, the description is nearly complete. It only lacks mention of error handling or prerequisites, which is a small gap for such a simple tool.

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 property 'order_number' is described as 'Mouser order number or web order number'), so the baseline is 3. The description adds no extra meaning beyond the schema—it does not clarify format, length, examples, or distinguish between order number types.

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 verb 'get' and resource 'order details by order number', distinguishing it from siblings like list_order_history (which returns a list) and get_order_options (which returns configuration options). It specifies the input method (order number) and the output categories (status, items, totals, shipping, tracking), leaving no ambiguity.

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 when to use it (when you need details for a specific order), but provides no explicit guidance on when not to use it or how it differs from siblings like list_order_history or get_order_options. There are no alternatives mentioned or exclusion criteria.

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