get_order

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

With no annotations, the description carries the burden of explaining behavior. It discloses the return content (customer info, items, etc.) and the verb 'Get' suggests a read-only operation, but it does not explicitly state side effects, permissions, or error behavior. This is adequate but not rich.

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 description is a single, front-loaded sentence that specifies the action, target, and key content areas. There is no superfluous text; every word adds value.

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 get-by-id tool with one parameter and no output schema, the description adequately outlines what the return contains (customer info, items, payment, shipping, discounts). It could be more precise about the response shape, but the 'full details' phrasing plus the enumerated list covers the main expectations.

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 the single 'id' parameter is already documented in the schema as 'Order ID'. The description adds 'full details' context but no new parameter syntax or format details, aligning with the baseline for high schema coverage.

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 uses a specific verb ('Get') and resource ('full order details by ID'), and enumerates the included information (customer info, items, payment, shipping, discounts). This clearly distinguishes it from list_orders and count_orders_by_status, which are about order listings and counts rather than single-order detail retrieval.

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 the tool is for fetching a single order's full details when an ID is known, which is clear context. It does not explicitly state when not to use it or name alternative tools, but the scope is evident from the 'by ID' qualifier and the detail focus.

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