calculate_profitability

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full transparency burden. It discloses that SKUs missing costs are flagged in 'missing_cogs_skus' rather than silently treated as zero-cost, which is important behavioral context. It could mention date range inclusivity or grouping semantics, but the key edge-case behavior is covered.

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 sentences, front-loaded with the core operation and metrics, then adding a critical prerequisite and edge-case behavior. Every sentence earns its place with no redundancy or 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?

Given the presence of an output schema, the description covers purpose, metrics, grouping, date format, prerequisite tool, and missing-cost behavior. This is complete enough for an agent to select and invoke the tool correctly without additional 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 description coverage is 0%, so the description compensates by specifying the date format (YYYY-MM-DD) and the valid group_by values ('sku', 'order', 'day'). It does not clarify requiredness or default values, but those are available in the schema itself.

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?

Description clearly states a specific verb ('Compute') and resource ('profitability'), and lists the metrics computed (revenue, Amazon fees, reimbursements, COGS, net profit, margin %), date range, and grouping options. This distinguishes it from sibling data-retrieval tools like get_orders or get_financial_events.

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 clear context by stating that SKU costs must be set via set_sku_cost, explicitly naming the prerequisite tool. It does not offer explicit when-not-to-use guidance or compare against alternatives like get_financial_events, but it gives enough context for appropriate use.

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