get_indiehackers_income_reports

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden for behavioral disclosure. It only states the operation and capabilities, omitting details like read-only nature, authentication needs, rate limits, or result format. For a data retrieval tool, this is insufficient.

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?

A single sentence of 20 words that front-loads the core action and key features. No extraneous information, every word 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?

Given no output schema, no annotations, and 5 parameters (including enums), the description is too minimal. It fails to explain return format, pagination, error handling, or caching behavior, leaving significant gaps for an agent to invoke correctly.

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 coverage is 100% (all 5 parameters have descriptions). The description adds some meaning by listing example category values and sort options, but it simplifies the enum values (e.g., says 'revenue' instead of 'highest-revenue') and does not elaborate on other parameters like limit or use_cache. Overall, baseline 3 is appropriate.

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 the tool retrieves income reports from Indie Hackers with Stripe-verified revenue, specifying filtering by category and sorting. It distinguishes from siblings like get_indiehackers_popular (popularity) and get_indie_revenue_dashboard (dashboard view), but does not explicitly differentiate.

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 implies usage for verified income reports with filtering and sorting, but provides no explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like get_indie_revenue_dashboard or search_trending_all. No when-not-to-use or exclusion criteria.

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