bos_smart_orders_summary

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full responsibility. It does not disclose whether the tool is read-only, requires specific permissions, or has any side effects. The name implies a safe aggregation, but behavioral traits are not explicitly stated.

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 in Vietnamese, no redundant information. Efficiently captures the core functionality and use case without extraneous detail.

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?

The tool has 3 required parameters and no output schema. The description omits details about the output structure, how comparison is computed (percentage/absolute), and whether results are time-series. Given the complexity of aggregations, more context is needed for complete understanding.

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%, with parameter descriptions in Vietnamese providing basic format info. The description adds context that compare_previous enables comparison with the previous period, but does not provide additional semantics beyond the schema.

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 states it aggregates revenue, AOV, distribution by status/source/cancel reason, and comparison with previous period. This clearly indicates the tool's purpose and distinguishes it from simple order listing or counting tools.

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 only says 'very useful for overview reports' but provides no explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus sibling tools like bos_order_list or bos_accounting_summary. No when-not or alternative usage is mentioned.

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