Retrieve an order

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

Annotations already mark this as read-only and non-destructive. The description adds meaningful behavioral detail beyond that, including the exact components of the returned order, the fact that line items carry the ID needed by the fulfil endpoint, and that monetary amounts use the smallest currency unit. This helps the agent set expectations and interpret values correctly.

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 compact sentences, front-loaded with the core action and packed with useful information. There is no filler, and every clause adds value: response scope, fulfil linkage, and currency unit.

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 only two self-explanatory parameters and no output schema, the description appropriately carries the responsibility of explaining the return payload. It enumerates the major order components and includes the critical currency-unit caveat, making it complete enough for an agent to invoke the tool and interpret the result correctly.

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 description coverage is 100%, so both order_id and store_id are already documented. The description does not add much parameter-level detail, but it also does not need to; the baseline of 3 applies because the schema carries the burden adequately.

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 it retrieves one order and enumerates the response contents: line items with fulfil-relevant IDs, addresses, totals breakdown, and fulfilments with tracking. This distinguishes it from sibling tools like ecommerce_listStoreOrdersV1 (list vs single) and ecommerce_cancelAnOrderV1/ecommerce_fulfilAnOrderV1 (mutations vs read).

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 phrase 'Retrieve one order in full' gives clear context that this is the tool for a single, complete order lookup, and the mention of the fulfil endpoint's needed ID links it to the order fulfilment workflow. It does not explicitly name alternatives or exclusion criteria, but the context is sufficient for an agent to choose it over list or mutation tools.

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