modx_ms2_list_orders

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. 'List' implies a read operation, but nothing is said about result ordering, pagination behavior (despite limit/start parameters), permissions required, or what the response contains. For an 8-parameter listing tool with zero annotation coverage, this is a significant transparency gap.

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 front-loaded sentence with no filler. It is appropriately sized for the information given, though the efficiency partly reflects under-specification rather than tight writing.

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?

With 8 optional parameters, no output schema, and no annotations, the description should explain defaults, pagination, and return shape. It covers only the filter concept, leaving a third of the parameters and all behavioral context undocumented, which is not enough for an agent to call this confidently.

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 only 13%, with just 'status' documented. The description compensates partially by naming the filter axes (status/customer/context/date range), which confirms the intent of those four parameters, but it never addresses limit, start, or query, and gives no format hints for the date boundaries.

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 and resource ('List miniShop2 orders (msOrder)') and names the filter dimensions, which distinguishes it from sibling modx_ms2_get_order and modx_ms2_update_order. The entity alias (msOrder) adds useful identification, though it doesn't explain scope such as whether all orders or only those in the current context are returned.

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 filterable-by clause implies when this tool is appropriate (browsing/filtering orders rather than fetching one by id), but no explicit when-to-use or when-not-to-use guidance is given. It never names modx_ms2_get_order as the alternative for retrieving a single order, so the agent must infer the split.

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