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

With no annotations, the description carries the full behavioral burden. It usefully discloses the Monday-to-Sunday window in the shop's time zone and the comparison against the prior week, but it does not state that the operation is read-only, whether permissions are required, or whether there are limits on result size.

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 definition is a single front-loaded sentence that defines scope first and then enumerates metrics. The metric list is long but each item contributes to understanding the report's coverage, so it remains reasonably efficient.

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?

An output schema exists, so return-value detail is not required, and the schema already defines the two parameters. The description adequately explains the reporting window and comparison behavior; the main missing piece is differentiation from sibling report tools.

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 50%, with week_of already well documented in the schema, including its default. The description does not add meaning to shop_id or week_of beyond what the schema provides, so the baseline of 3 applies.

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 that this is a weekly performance report for a shop, enumerating the metrics it covers and the comparison period. It is specific about scope but does not explicitly distinguish itself from sibling reports such as reports_revenue, reports_today, or reports_quoteWinRate.

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 weekly framing implies when the tool is appropriate, but there is no explicit guidance on when to choose it over sibling report tools. Alternatives are neither named nor excluded, leaving the agent to infer routing.

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