get_order_details

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It conveys a read operation via 'Fetches', but it does not describe what 'detailed information' includes, error behavior, or whether the response can be empty for invalid IDs. This is minimal behavioral context for a tool with no output schema.

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 a single, front-loaded sentence with no filler or redundant phrasing. It is concise and easy to parse, though it sacrifices completeness in other dimensions.

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 one-parameter getter, the description states the core purpose adequately. However, with no output schema, no annotations, and no detail on what 'detailed information' means, an agent cannot fully anticipate return shape or edge cases. Sibling tools imply orderId could come from list_orders, but that connection is not explicit.

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%, and the description does not explain the orderId parameter beyond what the schema already exposes (name and type 'string'). It loosely implies orderId targets the specific order, but it does not clarify format, source, or how to obtain it.

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 uses a specific verb ('Fetches') and resource ('detailed information for a specific cTrader order'), making the operation unambiguous. The word 'specific' clearly distinguishes it from siblings like list_orders, which presumably returns multiple orders.

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 implicitly tells the agent to use this when it needs details about one order, but it does not explicitly mention when to prefer it over list_orders or provide alternatives/exclusions. There is no guidance about needing to first obtain an orderId from another tool.

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