Get customer orders

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

Beyond the readOnlyHint annotation, it discloses pagination behavior and the critical coverage-envelope semantics, explicitly forbidding the agent to claim completeness when coverage is partial. This is exactly the kind of non-obvious behavior an agent needs.

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?

One dense, well-structured sentence with the main action first and the critical coverage caveat second. No filler or repetition of schema fields.

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?

Given no output schema, the description names the return envelope fields and gives the behavioral rule for partial coverage. For a read-only paginated listing with fully documented parameters, nothing essential to calling or interpreting the result is missing.

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 schema already documents id, page, and per_page fully. The description adds only the generic 'paginated' context, which meets but does not exceed the baseline for fully documented parameters.

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?

States a specific action (list) and resource (order IDs for a customer by customer ID), with pagination noted. This clearly separates it from siblings such as get_order (one order) and list_orders (all orders).

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?

Clear intended context: retrieve a customer's order IDs, paginated. It does not explicitly name alternatives or say when not to use it, so it misses the top bar for explicit routing, but the context is unambiguous.

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