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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, so the safe-read profile is covered. The description adds real context beyond that: newest-first ordering and that each receipt includes line items, payments, discounts and taxes. It does not mention pagination/cursor behavior or result limits, which would round it out.

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 tight sentences; the resource and payload contents come first, filters second. No filler and nothing repeated from the schema.

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 read-only list tool with no output schema, the description covers the resource, contents, ordering and main filter axes. Pagination handling is delegated to the well-documented cursor/limit params, so only minor gaps remain.

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 all 12 parameters are already documented in the schema. The description only loosely restates three filter categories (store, time range, receipt numbers), adding no syntax or semantics beyond what the schema provides.

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 ('List sales and refund receipts') plus the scope of returned data (line items, payments, discounts, taxes). This clearly separates it from the singular sibling loyverse_get_receipt.

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?

'Filter by store, time range or receipt numbers — the core of any sales question' gives contextual usage and hints at the primary filter axes, but never states when to prefer this over loyverse_get_receipt for a single receipt, nor any exclusion conditions.

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