List orders

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true, destructiveHint=false, and openWorldHint=true, so safety and idempotency are covered. The description adds 'paginated', which is a useful behavioral trait not evident from the schema alone (though per_page/page params imply it). No rate limits, auth needs, or filtering behavior are described, but the annotation baseline is met.

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?

One short sentence with zero waste and front-loaded purpose. Adequately concise for a simple list tool, though it may be too terse given the tool's context.

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?

With 7 parameters, no output schema, and a rich set of sibling tools, the description is insufficient. It does not mention available filters, default paging behavior, or what the response contains. The annotations cover safety, but the description should clarify how to use the tool effectively within this dense API surface.

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 86%, so most parameters are already documented (e.g., include, per_page, store_id, user_email). The description adds nothing about parameters, but per the rubric, high schema coverage justifies a baseline of 3. No compelling reason to deviate.

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 clear verb (Returns) and resource (paginated list of orders), which is adequate. However, it offers no differentiation from siblings like get_order or list_order_items, beyond the generic 'list' prefix. An agent can infer purpose but not disambiguate from adjacent tools.

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 on when to use this tool versus get_order, list_order_items, or any of the 60+ siblings. No context about what filters are available or when to prefer it. The description merely states existence, leaving selection entirely to the schema.

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