commerce_order_listRetrieve and filter Drupal commerce orders by store or custom criteria, with pagination controls for paging through results.
List commerce orders.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| filters | No | ||
| store_id | No | ||
| page_limit | No | ||
| page_offset | No |
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
No arguments | |||
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v0.1.0Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full behavioral burden, yet it says nothing about read-only semantics beyond the implied 'List' verb, pagination, filter behavior, or result volume. An output schema exists, so return structure need not be explained, but the description adds almost no behavioral context.
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 single sentence is short and front-loads the purpose, so there is no wasted wording. But brevity here reflects under-specification rather than economy: there is no content to be concise about.
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 4-parameter query tool with no annotations and an opaque filter object, the description is completely inadequate. Combined with zero schema coverage, an agent has no basis for constructing a correct call.
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 0%, so all four parameters (filters, store_id, page_limit, page_offset) are undocumented anywhere. The description provides no meaning for any of them, and the 'filters' parameter is an opaque free-form object with additionalProperties:true, which is especially in need of explanation.
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 verb (List) and resource (commerce orders), which is marginally more than the title 'Commerce Order List'. However, it makes no attempt to distinguish this from siblings like commerce_order_get (singular retrieval) or the other list tools such as commerce_product_list and commerce_store_list. Minimal but not tautological.
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?
There is no guidance on when to use this tool versus commerce_order_get, nor any mention of prerequisites, filtering conditions, or pagination behavior. The agent is left to infer usage entirely from the name.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.