gold_wc_daily_digest

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the transparency burden. It discloses some access context through 'BYOK' and 'PAID ONLY PRO $29', and the digest framing implies a read-only summary, but it never explicitly states the operation is non-destructive, nor does it explain rate limits, caching, or the meaning of 'BYOK'.

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 very short and front-loads the primary purpose, naming the data categories and the 'ONE call' value. The trailing 'BYOK. PAID ONLY PRO $29.' fragment adds access context but reads as marketing noise, and 'POWER TOOL' contributes little functional value, so it does not earn a 5.

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?

With only one optional parameter that is fully covered by the schema, an agent has enough to invoke the tool. However, there is no output schema and the description gives no indication of the returned payload structure beyond category names, leaving some ambiguity about how the digest is formatted.

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 single parameter days_back is fully documented in the schema with a default and valid range, so schema coverage is 100% and the baseline applies. The description adds no additional parameter guidance and its 'today's' phrasing may obscure the fact that days_back can request a 1-30 day window.

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 identifies the tool as a consolidated morning digest and enumerates its content: orders, revenue, AOV, low-stock products, and open orders. It lacks a direct verb like 'retrieve', and it does not explicitly contrast with sibling tools, but the combined-scope wording differentiates it from single-purpose siblings.

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 'morning briefing in ONE call' implies a clear daily-overview use case and suggests it replaces pulling multiple reports separately. However, it does not explicitly state when to prefer alternative tools or what scenarios would make another sibling more appropriate.

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