gold_get_reports

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must carry the behavioral burden. It does add useful behavior by noting 'BYOK fail-closed' and specifying the endpoint, but it omits details about response format, authentication mechanics, rate limits, or read-only confirmation beyond the verb 'get'.

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?

The description is compact and front-loads the main action and resource. The 'Gold PRO $29' pricing note is minor noise, but the endpoint, fail-closed behavior, and type list are all efficiently packed into two short sentences.

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 no annotations, no output schema, and four parameters, the description is incomplete. It does not explain how period and date range interact, what the return payload looks like, or any error/failure behavior beyond fail-closed. An agent would still have to guess at important invocation details.

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?

The schema has enums and field names but no descriptions, so parameter coverage in the schema is low. The description only repeats the 'type' enum values and leaves 'period', 'date_min', and 'date_max' unexplained, forcing the agent to infer date formats and report-period semantics.

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 clearly states it retrieves WooCommerce reports from the v3 reports API endpoint and enumerates six concrete report types. This makes it obvious what the tool does and distinguishes it from sibling getters like gold_get_order and gold_get_product.

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 implies that this tool should be used for report-style aggregate data and mentions BYOK fail-closed as a prerequisite, but it never explicitly names alternatives or states when not to use it. The usage context is clear but not fully articulated.

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