get_sales

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It indicates a read operation via 'Get' and scoping via 'recent', but it does not disclose ordering, default limits, pagination, time window, authentication needs, or whether the result is a flat list. This leaves important behavior unexplained.

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 a single, front-loaded, efficient sentence with no wasted words. It is appropriately sized for a zero-parameter tool, though it could have spent one more clause clarifying output behavior or sibling differences.

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 zero-parameter, no-output-schema tool, the description is minimally viable: it states what is retrieved and from where. However, with no annotations and no output schema, the absence of information about the result shape, recency window, and how this differs from get_sales_summary leaves noticeable gaps.

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?

The tool has zero parameters and the schema coverage is 100%, so there is no parameter documentation gap. The description adds implicit meaning by suggesting the tool returns a time-scoped set of sales, which is sufficient given the absence of parameters.

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 gives a specific verb ('Get'), a clear resource ('recent sales'), and a source ('your Gumroad store'). It is reasonably distinguishable from the sibling get_sales_summary because 'recent sales' implies a raw list rather than an aggregate, though it does not explicitly state that distinction.

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?

There is no guidance on when to use this tool versus get_sales_summary, get_products, or get_product. The word 'recent' weakly implies it is for a list of sales rather than a summary, but no explicit context or alternative routing is provided.

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