list_orders

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full behavioral burden. It implies a read/list operation but never states it is non-mutating, and says nothing about default result volume, sort order, or empty-result behavior. This is a meaningful gap for a tool with zero annotation coverage.

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?

A single efficient sentence with the resource front-loaded and the filter facets trailing, so nothing is wasted. It is arguably too terse given the gaps elsewhere, but the sentence itself earns its place.

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?

For a simple list tool with a fully documented schema and no output schema, the description is minimally adequate. However, with no annotations, it leaves the read-only nature and result-volume expectations unexplained, which slightly under-delivers for an agent deciding how to call it.

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%, so the schema already documents page, limit, search, and the status enum in full. The description only restates the same filter categories without adding syntax, format, or matching semantics beyond the schema. Baseline 3 applies.

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?

States a specific verb+resource ('List studio production orders') plus the filtering capabilities, which is clear. It does not explicitly differentiate from siblings like get_order_details or get_studio_stats, but the resource is distinct enough that an agent won't confuse it. Solid but not sibling-aware.

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 when-to-use or when-not-to-use guidance is given. The description says what can be filtered but never indicates the context that should trigger this tool over get_order_details or list_abandoned_quotes. The agent must infer usage entirely.

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