gumroad_get_sales_summary

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. It does disclose the output (gross/net/unit totals) and a relevant error behavior for getEarnings, but it does not state whether this tool is read-only, what happens when after/before are omitted, or any response structure. It is not misleading, but it is only moderately transparent.

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 compact and well-organized: a one-sentence summary followed by targeted operational guidance. Every sentence earns its place, including the operation id and the caution about tax-form endpoints, with no filler.

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 simple two-parameter tool with no output schema, the description covers the main return values and provides practical caveats. It does not explain default date-range behavior when both parameters are omitted or explicitly contrast with gumroad_get_sales, but these are minor gaps given the low complexity.

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 the schema already documents after and before with inclusive YYYY-MM-DD format. The description only adds 'over a date range,' which does not meaningfully extend the parameter semantics beyond the schema baseline.

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 identifies the tool as returning gross, net, and unit totals over a date range, and gives the operation id. It is specific about resource and scope, though it does not explicitly name the verb or distinguish itself from the sibling tool gumroad_get_sales beyond the 'summary' concept.

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 gives explicit guidance: 'Use this rather than getEarnings' and explains exactly when that alternative fails due to 'Tax center' not being enabled. It also warns that the error is an account setting and should not be retried, leaving no ambiguity about the intended choice.

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