Order details

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

No annotations exist, so description must carry the burden. It discloses max batch size, retention period, ID format, and the effect of include_pii. However, it doesn't mention error handling, rate limits, or confirm read-only nature.

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, no fluff. Purpose is front-loaded, and the key constraints (max IDs, retention, format) are efficiently stated.

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?

No output schema; description mentions 'detailed information' but doesn't specify response fields beyond the PII control. Could elaborate on what details are returned (e.g., status, cost). Schema covers all inputs, but output is undefined.

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% with descriptions for both parameters. The description adds the ID format ('DDDDDD-DDDDDDDD'), which complements the schema's example. But otherwise, it largely repeats schema information, so baseline 3 is appropriate.

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 'Fetch detailed information for orders' with a specific verb and resource, and mentions the HTTP endpoint. While it doesn't explicitly differentiate from siblings like yandex_eats_orders_history, the focus on details by ID list distinguishes it implicitly.

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?

Provides batch size limit (100 IDs) and data retention (180 days) but does not specify when to use this tool versus alternatives (e.g., yandex_eats_orders_history for listing). No explicit when-not-to-use guidance.

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