list_statuses

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

Annotations declare readOnlyHint=true, covering the safety profile. The description adds value by disclosing the content (codes, names, groups, ordering) and the intended usage context, but doesn't go beyond that (e.g., no pagination or inactive status details). With annotations lowering the bar, a score of 3 is appropriate.

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 crisp clauses, zero filler. One sentence, front-loaded with the resource and followed by a practical directive. Every word earns its place.

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?

Simple tool with one optional param and no output schema. The description covers what the tool returns (all order statuses with fields) and when to use it. No significant gaps for this 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?

The sole parameter 'raw' is fully described in the schema (100% coverage), so the description doesn't need to add parameter semantics. It doesn't, which is fine for the baseline.

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 returns all order statuses with their codes, names, groups, and ordering, distinguishing it from other list_* siblings by specifying the resource and a concrete use case. The verb is implicit in the tool name, but the resource and content are explicit.

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?

Provides explicit when-to-use guidance: 'Call before filtering/updating orders by status.' This tells the agent when to invoke this tool. However, it doesn't mention alternatives or when not to use it, so it stops short of a 5.

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