Get BilkaToGo order history

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

Annotations only cover read-only and open-world; the description adds substantial context they don't: newest-first ordering, one-page-at-a-time paging with `next_offset` null on the last page, PII redaction with a marker, an auth requirement, and a prompt-injection warning about untrusted order text. That is exactly the behavioral burden the annotations leave open.

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?

Front-loaded with purpose, then return fields, then the sibling pointer, then paging, then safety caveats — a sensible order. The return-field enumeration and untrusted-data warning are dense but each earns its place; a slightly tighter phrasing would be the only improvement.

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?

There is no output schema, and the description compensates by naming the returned fields including the `total` vs `ordered_total` distinction and `next_offset`. Combined with auth, redaction, and untrusted-data notes, nothing an agent needs to call and interpret this tool correctly is missing.

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 limit/offset are already documented and the baseline is 3. The description adds value by explaining the continuation contract (`next_offset` is the next page's offset or null), which makes the offset/limit pair usable without guessing how to page.

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 specific verb and resource ('List the user's past BilkaToGo orders') plus ordering ('newest first') and pagination shape. It also distinguishes itself from get_order_details by explaining that details require passing an order id to that sibling.

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?

Explicitly routes the agent to get_order_details for full order contents, and names the prerequisite ('Needs a BilkaToGo login'). It lacks an explicit when-not-to-use statement (e.g. for a single known order), but the context is clear enough to select correctly.

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