Dashboard

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must carry behavioral burden. It discloses a meaningful filtering rule ('Excludes cancelled/failed/refunded orders from revenue'), which is non-obvious behavior. It stops short of describing auth requirements, rate limits, or caching, and defers return-shape details to the output schema.

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?

Three sentences, front-loaded with the capability, then the routing cue, then the revenue exclusion rule. 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?

The tool has an output schema, so return values need not be described. The description covers capability, scope, and a key filtering rule, but omits what unit the revenue windows use, any timezone assumptions, and the meaning of the low_stock_threshold parameter.

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% and the single parameter low_stock_threshold has no description. The description mentions 'stock alerts' but does not explain that the threshold parameter controls them, leaving the parameter undocumented. A 4 reflects that only one optional parameter exists and it has a default, so the omission is low-impact.

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 opens with a specific verb+resource framing ('One-call store overview') and enumerates the exact content: revenue windows, order status breakdown, stock alerts, latest orders. It self-labels as the 'give me a store summary' tool, making it unambiguous against siblings like sales_summary or get_orders.

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 phrase 'The "give me a store summary" tool' provides a clear usage cue, and 'One-call' implies it replaces multiple granular calls. However, it does not explicitly name or exclude alternatives such as sales_summary or get_stock_report, which is the main gap for a 5.

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