analyze_sales_trend

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, so the safety profile is known. The description adds useful behavioral context by detailing the return structure (revenue, order count, growth percentage), which helps the agent understand what to expect. However, it does not disclose limitations like date range handling or edge cases.

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 concise sentences with no extraneous information. Each sentence earns its place: first states purpose, second specifies outputs. Well-structured and front-loaded.

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 that an output schema exists and annotations cover read-only, the description is largely complete. It names the key outputs. However, it could mention that the tool compares periods or handles time ranges implicitly, but for a simple read tool, this is adequate.

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 parameters are already well-documented in the schema. The description does not add new semantic meaning beyond the schema; it only restates the tool's focus on growth. Baseline 3 is appropriate when schema does the heavy lifting.

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 specifies the verb 'analyze' and the resource 'sales trends' with a focus on period-over-period growth rates. It lists specific output metrics (revenue, order count, growth percentage) and distinguishes from siblings like get_revenue_report or get_top_products by emphasizing trend analysis and growth rates.

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?

No guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. The description does not mention conditions, prerequisites, or explicitly state scenarios where another sibling tool might be more appropriate. The sibling list exists but is not leveraged in the description.

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