Download sales and trends report

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint and openWorldHint, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds real operational context beyond that: the result is returned as parsed rows, the vendor number's location in App Store Connect, and the one-day availability lag that affects reportDate choices.

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?

Three short sentences, each carrying distinct information: what is returned, how to obtain the required vendor number, and the freshness constraint. Nothing is redundant and the core action is front-loaded.

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?

For an eight-parameter tool with no output schema, the definition covers the essentials: parsed rows as output, saveTo/maxRows documented in schema, and the timing caveat. It stops short of describing what the parsed rows contain or how to interpret an empty report, which is a minor 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 coverage is 75%, so the description needs to add some meaning, and it does for the undocumented vendorNumber by saying where to find it, plus a timing note relevant to reportDate defaults. It does not explain the reportType/reportSubType interactions, but those enums are documented in the schema.

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 gives a specific verb ('Download') and a well-defined resource ('a Sales and Trends report'), and parenthetically enumerates the report families it covers. It distinguishes itself from asc_download_finance_report by naming the Sales and Trends report domain, though it never explicitly routes to or away from that sibling.

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?

Usage context is implied rather than stated: it explains where to find the vendor number and notes that reports usually appear a day after the reporting date, which implicitly guides timing. But there is no explicit when-to-use/when-not guidance and no mention of the finance or analytics report siblings as alternatives.

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