asc_get_sales_report

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. It discloses timezone (America/Los_Angeles), Apple's data lag, and truncation via maxLines. It does not explicitly state the tool is read-only, but the context implies it. No contradictions.

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 concise with bullet points, front-loaded with purpose, and each sentence adds value. No wasted words.

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 tool with 6 parameters and no output schema, the description covers purpose, date formats, report types, lag, and timezone. It lacks details on maxLines truncation behavior beyond header preservation, but is otherwise comprehensive.

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%. The description adds value for reportDate format and reportType meanings, but does not explain version, maxLines, frequency, or reportSubType. Baseline of 3 is appropriate as the description partially compensates.

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 'Download a sales/subscription report as TSV' and lists report types and date formats. It does not explicitly differentiate from sibling tools like asc_get_subscription_events, but the purpose is specific and actionable.

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 explains when to use each reportType (SALES for downloads+revenue, SUBSCRIPTION for active subscriptions, etc.) and mentions Apple's 1-day lag. It does not provide explicit when-not-to-use or alternatives, but the guidance is clear.

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