get_account_orders

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

With no annotations, the description must disclose behavior. It states the operation is a read ('Get all orders') and clarifies the required input, but it does not mention response format, pagination, errors, or permissions. This is minimally sufficient 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 concise sentences, front-loaded with the purpose, and contains no unnecessary words. Every phrase adds value.

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 low complexity (single parameter, no output schema, no annotations), the description covers the essential purpose and parameter. It lacks explicit usage exclusions, but for a simple read tool it is sufficiently complete.

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%, so the description must compensate. It explains that 'accountId' is the account whose order history is retrieved, but does not provide additional details about the ID format or source. This adds some meaning beyond the raw schema.

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 retrieves all orders for a FastSpring customer account, with a specific verb ('Get') and resource ('orders'). It also distinguishes itself from siblings like get_order (single order) and list_orders_by_email (by email).

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 the use case: when you have a customer account ID and need full order history. It does not explicitly name alternatives or exclusions, but the context is clear enough for an agent to select it over siblings.

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