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

Annotations already cover the read-only/idempotent/non-destructive profile, and the description adds genuinely new context: the 31-day limit, the deliberate exclusion of PII fields (customer names, emails, addresses, tax IDs), and the warning that a page is not total revenue. What's missing is pagination behavior (how to know when pages are exhausted).

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?

Three tight sentences, each carrying distinct information (scope, exclusions, revenue caveat), with the hardening constraints front-loaded. No filler.

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?

Covers data scope, privacy exclusions, and the partial-result caveat, which is decent for a read-only report. But with no output schema and zero parameter documentation, the definition leaves pagination and parameter usage underspecified for a 4-parameter paged endpoint.

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 0% across 4 parameters, so the description must compensate and largely doesn't. It never explains the meaning of 'page' vs 'count', how paging interacts with the date range, or the date format, leaving the agent to infer from the raw schema.

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 verb and resource ('Read one page of sales') plus the key scope constraint (at most 31 days). It is distinguishable from the other report siblings by resource, though it doesn't explicitly name which sibling to use for a different report.

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 31-day cap and 'one page' framing imply usage but there is no explicit when-to-use guidance, no mention of how to get totals vs pages, and no alternative named among the many report/list siblings. The agent must infer routing.

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