Get Order

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It discloses the API key requirement and the exactly-one constraint. The verb 'Fetch' implies a read-only operation. However, it does not describe behavior for conflicting/missing IDs or error responses, leaving some transparency gaps.

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 two short sentences, front-loaded with the primary action and constraint. Every word contributes; there is no redundant or filler content.

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 low-complexity tool with only two parameters and no output schema, the description is largely sufficient: it covers purpose, identifier options, exclusivity, and authentication. It does not describe the return structure, but given the simplicity, this is acceptable.

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?

The input schema already describes both parameters, giving a baseline of 3. The description adds meaningful constraint semantics ('provide exactly one') and clarifies how clientOrderId relates to the lookup, providing value beyond the schema.

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 clearly states the tool fetches a single order by order id or client order id, using the specific verb 'Fetch' and the resource 'single order'. This distinguishes it from sibling list tools like get_orders_history or get_open_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?

It provides clear context for using this tool (single-order lookup) and the constraint to provide exactly one identifier. However, it does not explicitly name alternatives or state when not to use it, so it misses the 'alternatives' aspect that would earn a 5.

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