List sales orders

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It discloses that filtering is optional and lists filter categories, but it does not mention pagination behavior, default/max record counts, response shape, or the raw OData filter semantics. The 'List' verb implies a read-safe operation, but deeper behavioral context is missing.

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?

A single, well-structured sentence begins with the verb 'List', names the resource, and lists optional filter categories. There is zero redundancy, and every part of the sentence contributes to understanding the tool's purpose.

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?

Given the moderate complexity of a list tool with 7 parameters, the description provides a sufficient overview of purpose and filtering. Combined with the fully described schema, an agent can likely invoke the tool correctly. The only missing context is response format and pagination defaults, but these are not critical for a list operation.

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% for all 7 parameters, so the baseline is 3. The description adds a high-level grouping of filters (customer, status, date range) and repeats the status values, but it does not introduce any new details beyond what the schema already provides.

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 lists sales orders, with the specific verb 'List' and resource 'sales orders'. It distinguishes from the sibling tool 'bc_get_sales_order' by implying a list versus single-record operation, and it enumerates key filter options (customer number, status, date range).

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 implies usage for retrieving sales orders with optional filters, but it does not explicitly state when to use this tool over alternatives like bc_get_sales_order or bc_list_sales_invoices. No exclusions or alternative recommendations are given, leaving the agent to infer context from the tool name.

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