Get one BilkaToGo order

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

The description adds substantial behavioral context beyond the readOnlyHint and openWorldHint annotations: it explains authentication requirements, that personal data is redacted, that payment details are omitted, and that Bilka-provided text is untrusted data. These are important operational and safety details that an agent needs before invoking the tool.

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 dense but well organized: it front-loads what the tool returns, then adds currency, reorder workflow, id source, privacy behavior, authentication, and the untrusted-data warning. Every sentence contributes useful information for invoking and interpreting the tool.

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 no output schema, the description does the work of explaining the returned order contents in detail, including item fields, fees, totals, and delivery/pickup information. It also covers privacy redaction, omitted payment details, authentication, and untrusted data, leaving no major gaps for this tool's complexity.

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 100%, and the single order_id parameter already documents its source and format via the schema. The description repeats the get_order_history provenance but adds no further parameter-specific semantics, so the baseline of 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 states a specific action and resource: retrieving everything in one past BilkaToGo order, including items, fees, totals, and delivery/pickup details. It clearly distinguishes this from get_order_history by emphasizing a single order and by directing the agent to get_order_history for order ids.

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 clear usage context: take order ids from get_order_history, use product ids with cart tools to buy an order again, and note that a BilkaToGo login is required. It does not explicitly state when not to use this tool, but the sibling relationship and workflow are clear.

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