prom_seller_get_order

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full behavioral burden, yet it discloses nothing beyond the basic operation: no auth requirements, no behavior when the id is unknown, and no indication of what the returned order contains. A read-only nature is only implied by the verb 'Get'.

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 short, front-loaded sentence with no wasted words. It is appropriately sized for a simple lookup, though the extreme brevity is part of the reason detail is missing.

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?

The tool is simple (one required param, no nesting, no output schema), so a terse description is defensible. Still, for a fetch-by-id tool with no annotations and no schema descriptions, an agent gets no guidance on failure modes or return shape, leaving a genuine gap.

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's 'by id' merely restates the single required parameter without adding format or source guidance. It does not clarify that the id may be a string or integer, nor what kind of order identifier is expected.

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 (Get) and resource (seller order), and the singleton scope ('one') implicitly distinguishes it from the sibling prom_seller_list_orders. It does not name the alternative explicitly, but the purpose is unambiguous.

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 statement of when to use this versus prom_seller_list_orders, prom_seller_get_product, or the other get_* siblings. The only usable signal is the word 'one', leaving the agent to infer the retrieval-by-id scenario.

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