shop_dashboard_summary

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

With no annotations available, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It states the tool 'returns' data, implying a read-only operation, but it gives no details about potential side effects, data freshness, scoping (e.g., all products vs. published only), or any limitations. Unlike the get_calls example where annotations covered safety, here the description is the only source and it is sparse.

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 a single, front-loaded sentence that efficiently communicates the core purpose without wasted words. It earns its place by stating the action and the exact counts included.

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 is simple with zero parameters, and the description adequately states what it returns. However, there is no output schema, so the description is the only reference for the return structure. It mentions the three count types but not how they are packaged (e.g., an object with specific keys) or whether there are any additional fields, leaving some ambiguity for the agent.

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 input schema has zero parameters, so the baseline is 4. The description correctly implies no inputs are needed and does not need to explain parameter 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 a specific verb ('returns') and resource ('compact overview of the shop') and enumerates the content (product, order, and customer counts). It distinguishes itself from sibling tools like get_order_count, get_product_count, and get_customer_count by offering a combined summary rather than individual counts.

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 provides no explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as get_product_count or get_order_count. The phrase 'compact overview' implies a dashboard use case, but there is no mention of when to prefer this over individual count endpoints or any exclusions.

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