Get Order Details

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

Annotations already establish read-only, idempotent, non-destructive behavior. The description adds that the tool returns the latest state and includes received SMS content, which is useful behavioral context beyond what annotations convey.

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 sentences carry the purpose, scope, returned fields, and tool routing with no filler. The key information about the latest state is front-loaded.

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?

For a simple single-parameter read operation, the description is complete: it states inputs, outputs, scope, and relationship to a sibling tool. The safety profile is already covered by annotations, and no output schema is needed to call the tool correctly.

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 single parameter order_id is already fully described in the schema at 100% coverage. The description restates the need for an order_id without adding format, source, or validation semantics, so it meets the baseline but adds no schema-independent value.

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 names a specific action and resource ('get the full details of a specific order') and enumerates the returned fields (status, phone number, service, country, timestamps, SMS code/text). It also differentiates from get_sms by saying it returns beyond what that tool provides, making it clear among many siblings.

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?

It gives an explicit trigger condition ('Use this when you have an order_id and need the latest state') and names the relevant alternative (get_sms), indicating what that alternative does not cover. This is sufficient routing guidance.

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