orders_history

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

Annotations declare readOnlyHint=true, and description confirms read-only behavior. It adds context about incremental sync and paginated return, which aligns with annotations and provides useful behavioral details beyond what annotations cover.

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?

Two sentences, front-loaded with core purpose, no fluff. Every sentence adds value: purpose, sync support, return format.

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 read-only history tool with 7 parameters and no required fields, the description adequately covers return format and incremental sync. No output schema, but the return structure is described explicitly.

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 100%, so baseline is 3. Description highlights key parameters (filter_since_id, date window) for sync, adding context beyond schema descriptions. Not all parameters are elaborated, but the most important ones are emphasized.

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?

Description clearly states it retrieves order change history with status transitions and supports incremental sync. It distinguishes from related tools like get_order (single order) and list_orders (list of 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?

Description explains when to use the tool (for history with incremental sync via filter_since_id and date window), but does not explicitly mention when not to use or contrast with sibling tools like customers_history.

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