wafle_orders_list

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint and idempotentHint. The description adds a useful behavioral detail: the response includes meta.gatewayId and meta.gatewayType for correlating with payment status. This goes beyond the annotations without contradicting them.

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 three sentences, each earning its place: what it does, when to use it, and a notable response field. No fluff, fully front-loaded.

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 list tool with strong annotations and schema, the description is fairly complete. It covers purpose, usage, and one important response aspect. It doesn't detail default ordering or response envelope, but those are not required given the schema and no output schema.

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 75%, so baseline is 3. The description mentions filter categories (status, date range, customer email, search) but adds little beyond what the schema already provides. The 'search' parameter is undocumented in the schema and the description doesn't explain its semantics, so it doesn't fully compensate.

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 lists orders for a store with pagination and filters, using a specific verb and resource. It does not explicitly differentiate from the sibling wafle_checkout_orders_list, but the focus on store slug and filters is reasonably specific.

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 gives explicit usage context: 'Use this for any 'pendientes', 'enviados', 'últimos N días' style query.' This tells the agent when to use it, though it doesn't mention alternatives or exclusion cases.

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