Get Sales Forecast

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and openWorldHint=true, indicating safety and no side effects. The description adds that it returns predicted sales volume, which is behavioral information beyond the annotations. It does not contradict annotations, and the additional context is valuable.

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 extremely concise with two sentences that front-load the purpose. Every word adds value—no fluff, no irrelevant details. It efficiently conveys the tool's core function and constraints.

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?

Given the tool's simplicity (2 simple params, no output schema, no nested objects), the description is largely complete. It states what the tool does and what it returns. It lacks details on error handling or return format, but for a read-only forecasting tool with clear parameters, it covers the essential context.

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 coverage is 100% with clear descriptions for both parameters. The tool description reiterates the schema but adds no new semantic meaning for the parameters themselves (e.g., format of offerId, specific range details for weeksAhead). Baseline is 3 since schema does the heavy lifting.

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 specifies the action ('Get') and resource ('sales forecast for a specific offer'), and it distinguishes itself from sibling tools by focusing on forecasting. The mention of returning predicted sales volume for a specified number of weeks adds clarity. The tool is unique among siblings, so no confusion.

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 provides no explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives or when not to use it. While the purpose is clear, there is no mention of prerequisites, edge cases, or comparisons to similar tools like get_offer_insights. Usage is implied but not directly addressed.

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