list_orders

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden, but it adds no behavioral insight beyond what the name implies. It doesn't state that the operation is read-only, doesn't disclose pagination behavior, and gives no context on return values or side effects.

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, short sentence with no wasted words, front-loading the core purpose. However, it's so minimal that it arguably under-specifies, though this is not a conciseness flaw but a completeness issue.

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?

Given the tool has three parameters, an enum filter, and no output schema, the description is too thin. It doesn't explain pagination, status filtering, or what the response looks like, leaving agents with insufficient context for a list operation.

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 covers all three parameters with descriptions, so the schema already provides the parameter meanings. The tool description adds no extra semantics beyond the schema, so the baseline 3 is appropriate.

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 ('List orders from your Getir store'), with a specific verb and resource. It implicitly distinguishes from siblings like get_order (singular) and accept/reject_order (mutations), though it doesn't explicitly name alternatives.

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 guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus get_order or other sibling tools. There's no mention of filtering by status, pagination, or typical use cases, so agents must infer the intended usage from the name alone.

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