willys_get_orders

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

With no annotations, the description must disclose behavioral traits. It states it gets history (implying read-only) but does not describe authentication requirements, pagination behavior, return format, or error scenarios. The sessionId parameter is only visible in the schema, not the description.

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 extremely short, which is concise, but the ambiguous 'sidad' and lack of any structure (e.g., sentences, usage hints) make it insufficient. It is under-specified rather than efficiently worded.

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 tool requires authentication (sessionId) and supports pagination (limit/offset), the description is incomplete. It does not explain how to use pagination or what to expect in the response, and there is no output schema to fill the gap.

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 does not explain sessionId, limit, or offset. Parameter names give some hint, but no additional meaning is added beyond the raw schema fields.

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 'Hämta orderhistorik' clearly states the tool retrieves order history, which is a specific verb+resource. It is distinguishable from sibling 'willys_get_order_details' by the plural 'orders' vs singular 'order', though the trailing 'sidad' is unclear and does not aid clarity.

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?

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives. The description does not mention differences from siblings like 'willys_get_order_details' or any context for ordering/pagination.

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