get_order

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

With no annotations provided, the description fully discloses key behaviors: it checks both current and legacy platforms, returns a 'platform' field indicating the source, and details the exact fields present in modern vs. legacy responses. This goes beyond basic fetch semantics and gives the agent precise expectations.

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 well-structured and front-loaded with the core action, followed by useful behavioral and response details. Every sentence adds value, including the breakdown of modern vs. legacy fields, without extraneous 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?

Given there is no output schema, the description effectively explains the return value, including the 'platform' and 'data' fields and their contents. It covers the parameter, platform detection, and field differences, making the tool fully comprehensible 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?

The input schema only defines 'reference' as a string. The description adds meaning by explaining it accepts ID or reference number and provides an example format. This compensates for the 0% schema description coverage, making the parameter semantics clear.

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's purpose with a specific verb ('Fetch') and resource ('FastSpring order'). It also specifies the identifier types (ID or reference number) and includes an example format, distinguishing it from sibling tools that list orders or handle subscriptions.

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: use when you have an order identifier to fetch a single order. It provides context about dual-platform lookup but does not explicitly mention alternatives or when not to use. This is clear context without exclusions.

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