get_sales_summary

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

No annotations are provided, and the description does not disclose behavioral traits such as read-only status, authentication requirements, or whether the tool aggregates all invoices or only certain types. The minimal description leaves the agent uninformed about key behaviors.

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 extremely short and front-loaded, which is good for conciseness. However, it lacks necessary details, making it too minimal rather than efficiently informative.

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 output schema, the description should explain what the tool returns (e.g., aggregated totals, breakdowns). It only says 'sales summary' without elaboration. This is insufficient for a tool that likely returns structured data.

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 provides complete descriptions (100% coverage) for both parameters ('from' and 'to'), explaining they are date ranges based on issue date. The tool description adds no extra meaning beyond this, so baseline score of 3 is appropriate.

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 the tool's purpose: summarizing sales over a specified period. It uses a verb (売上集計, meaning 'sales summary') and resource (sales), and distinguishes from sibling tools which are invoicing-specific. The brief wording is clear but could be more explicit about the output.

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?

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives or when not to use it. The sibling tools are all about invoices and quotes, so the context is somewhat implied, but explicit direction is missing.

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