Get order

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

The readOnlyHint annotation already declares a non-destructive operation. The description adds context about the response contents (line items, delivery chunks, payment, status) which is helpful, but it does not disclose potential error cases, authentication needs, or other behavioral traits. This meets the minimum viable level with annotations present.

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, well-structured sentence that front-loads the core purpose and includes important response details. No unnecessary words or repetition.

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 simple get-by-ID tool with one parameter, a schema that fully documents that parameter, and a readOnlyHint annotation, the description adequately covers what the tool returns. It could mention not-found behavior or more detail about response structure, but the included list of response components makes it sufficiently complete for an agent.

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 input schema provides full coverage for the single parameter 'id' with a clear description ('Order ID (UUID)'). The description's phrase 'by its ID' adds no new meaning beyond the schema. With 100% schema_description_coverage, 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 the action 'Get' and the specific resource 'a single order by its ID', and further specifies the included data (line items, delivery chunks, payment, status). This distinguishes it well from sibling tools like list_orders (which lists multiple orders) and get_order_addons (which focuses on addons).

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 implicitly conveys usage: use this tool when you have an order ID and need a single order. It does not explicitly mention alternatives or exclusions, but the phrase 'single order by its ID' provides clear context. Lacks an explicit 'when not to use' or reference to list_orders, so not a 5.

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