Registro de ventas

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, destructiveHint=false and openWorldHint=false. Beyond that, the description adds useful behavioral context by listing the purchase statuses returned and stating that buyer contact data is excluded, though it still omits pagination or ordering behavior.

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 compact sentences with the role/read-only tag and core action front-loaded. Every clause adds scope, returned fields, or privacy information without repetition or filler.

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 a simple read-only list tool with no output schema, the definition covers the returned fields and an important privacy exclusion. It is still silent on pagination behavior around limit, leaving a small but relevant 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 67%: status and classroom_id are documented in the schema, while limit is not. The description helps status semantics by naming paid, pending and failed states, but it does not explain the limit parameter or explicitly map those statuses to the status filter.

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?

States a specific verb and resource: lists classroom purchases and enumerates the included statuses and fields. It is clearly a sales listing rather than a summary, but it does not explicitly name or differentiate itself from siblings such as sales_summary or sales_funnel.

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 implied use is to inspect individual classroom purchases, with the classroom-admin/read-only tag framing the context. It gives no explicit when-to-use versus sales_summary or sales_funnel guidance, so the agent must infer the alternative.

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