top_employees_by_sales

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

readOnlyHint=true already tells the agent this is a safe read. The description adds the ranking semantics (by amount or receipt count) but says nothing about ordering direction, ties, or whether the returned list is truncated — minor additions over the annotation baseline.

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?

Two compact sentences, front-loaded with purpose and followed by a concrete usage example. No filler, every clause earns its place.

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 read-only ranking query with no output schema, the description conveys intent, subject, and metric options adequately. It stops short of describing the response shape or how period interacts with from/to, but nothing critical for correct invocation is missing.

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%, including enum values, defaults, and the limit range, so the schema carries the full parameter burden. The description restates the two metric options but adds no syntax or interaction detail (e.g., period vs from/to precedence), so baseline 3 is correct.

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?

States a specific verb (Get) and resource (top employees by sales amount or receipt count), and the parenthetical '(waiters/cashiers)' clarifies what 'employee' means in this domain. The ranking metric alternatives in the sentence also distinguish it from sibling top_selling_items without naming it directly.

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 sample question 'Which waiter sold the most this month?' pins down the intended analytical use case clearly. However, it gives no explicit guidance on when to prefer this over sales_summary or how to combine period vs from/to, so there's context but no exclusions or alternatives.

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