Get top-selling products

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden and delivers: cancelled orders are always excluded, half-open UTC interval semantics, open-bound behavior when one bound is omitted, and the from<to validation rule. This is exemplary behavioral disclosure for a read-only reporting tool.

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?

Front-loaded with the core ranking behavior, then each subsequent sentence earns its place: tie-breaking, cancellation exclusion, default, interval semantics, bounds, validation, and a usage example. No filler or redundancy.

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?

Complete for a simple tool with zero required parameters and no output schema. Covers behavior, param semantics, defaults, validation, and usage. The implied return (ranked products with units sold) is sufficient for the stated question.

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 0%, yet the description fully documents from/to: the YYYY-MM-DD format, the half-open interval, open-side behavior, and the strict ordering validation. It also states the limit default of 5. It compensates comprehensively for a schema that lacks property descriptions.

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, resource, and metric: 'Ranks products by units sold, descending'. Defines tie-breaking (revenue then product id), distinguishing it from revenue-, customer-, and country-based siblings. Ends with an explicit usage example that pins the purpose.

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?

Provides an explicit when-to-use signal: 'Use this to answer "what are the top 5 best-selling products?"'. However, it does not name alternative siblings or state when NOT to use it, leaving the differentiation to the metric description rather than an explicit exclusion.

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