Get ClickBank order

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

Beyond the readOnlyHint annotation, the description does not disclose behavior such as what happens for an unknown receipt, whether multiple orders can share a receipt, or what fields are returned. It adds no behavioral context beyond restating the tool's purpose.

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, tightly worded sentence with no filler or redundant clauses. The required input is front-loaded in the phrase 'for a receipt ID,' giving maximum clarity in minimal space.

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 single-parameter read-only lookup, the description provides enough to invoke the tool correctly. However, with no output schema, it does not specify what 'order details' includes or how missing or invalid receipts are handled, leaving some ambiguity.

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 coverage is 100%: the receipt parameter is already documented as a ClickBank receipt ID. The description repeats this same concept without adding format constraints, lookup semantics, or edge-case details, so the baseline of 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?

The description states a clear action ('Get order details') and a key lookup resource (receipt ID), making the tool's function immediately identifiable. It does not explicitly contrast with sibling tools like list_orders or get_order_upsells, so it misses full differentiation.

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 provides no guidance on when to choose this tool over alternatives such as list_orders, get_order_upsells, or check_order_active. The only implicit signal is that it requires a receipt ID, which is not enough to help an agent decide between tools.

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