get_user_sale_totals

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

Annotations already declare readOnly, idempotent, openWorld and non-destructive, so the safety profile is covered. The only extra context is 'as reported by Lightspeed', which hints at the data source but says nothing about aggregation period, caching, or what 'totals' includes. With annotations carrying the burden, this adds very little.

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?

It is a single short phrase with no wasted words, but it is undersized for the information an agent needs. Brevity here comes at the cost of specificity rather than from efficiency.

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?

An output schema exists so return values need not be explained, but the description omits the aggregation window (all-time? date range?) and the provenance of user_id, both of which are essential to calling this correctly. For a reporting tool, that is a material gap.

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 0% and the single required parameter user_id is undocumented in the schema. The description's phrase 'a staff user's' only weakly implies that user_id is a staff user identifier; it does not say where to obtain it or whether it differs from a customer id.

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 names a specific resource (a staff user's sales totals) and a source (Lightspeed), but gives no verb and no scope, so an agent cannot tell whether this returns a single figure, a breakdown, or a time series. It is distinguishable from list_users, but not clearly from sales_summary.

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?

There is no statement of when to use this instead of sales_summary or get_sale, and no prerequisite noted (e.g. that user_id comes from list_users). The agent must infer usage entirely from the name.

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