List receipts

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and destructiveHint=false, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds the behavioral limitation about the Unlimited Sales History add-on, including a concrete error condition for older date ranges, which goes beyond the annotations.

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?

Two concise sentences with no filler. The first sentence states the core function and scope; the second delivers a critical operational limitation. Every word earns its place.

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 description discloses the key add-on limitation, which is valuable. However, for a list tool with 11 filters and no output schema, it omits expected response shape, pagination behavior, or default ordering, leaving an agent partially uncertain about what the call will return.

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 description does not explain any of the 11 parameters, and the schema coverage is only 55%. Several parameters (e.g., store_id, receipt_numbers, since/before_receipt_number) lack descriptions, and nothing in the description compensates for those gaps. The mention of line items, taxes, and discounts relates to response content, not 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 states a clear verb and resource: 'List sales and refund receipts with their line items, taxes, discounts and payments.' This distinguishes it from single-receipt and mutation tools, though it doesn't explicitly name sibling alternatives.

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 important context about the 31-day data window and the payment-required error for older ranges, which informs usage. However, it does not explicitly mention when to prefer this tool over get_receipt or sales_summary, or when not to use it.

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