Get order

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and openWorldHint=true, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds useful context about the shape of the payload (line items, shipping, payment, notes) beyond the annotations, but says nothing about error behavior for missing ids or whether the record is scoped to a store/workspace.

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 compact clause with zero filler, front-loading the resource and its returned contents. It is a fragment rather than a sentence, but nothing is wasted.

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?

With no output schema, the description's brief enumeration of returned sections carries part of the burden, but it does not explain the id semantics or error cases for a lookup tool that can legitimately fail. Adequate but with clear gaps given the absence of both output schema and parameter documentation.

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 `id` parameter has 0% schema description coverage and the description never mentions it, so it is unclear whether this is an internal order id, an order number, or a platform-specific identifier. With low schema coverage and one parameter, the description should compensate but does not.

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 resource (one order) and enumerates what it contains — line items, shipping, payment, notes — which distinguishes it from the sibling list_orders. It omits an explicit verb, so the agent must infer 'retrieve', but the singular framing makes the read-one semantic unambiguous.

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 statement of when to use this tool versus list_orders or search_customers, and no mention of prerequisites or failure conditions (e.g., what happens with an unknown or deleted order id). The only differentiation is implicit in the singular noun.

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