Resumen de ventas

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

Annotations already cover readOnly/destructive/openWorld, so the description is free to add real value: it discloses the classroom-admin authorization requirement, that only *paid* sales count, and that buyer contact data is deliberately excluded. Return shape (totals + per-course breakdown) is also sketched, though pagination or aggregation granularity is not addressed.

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 sentences with the role/read-only banner front-loaded, followed by scope and then the exclusion. Every clause carries information and nothing is repeated from the title.

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?

With only two parameters and annotations in place, the description suffices: it tells the agent what the aggregate contains and what it deliberately omits (contact data), partially compensating for the absence of an output schema. It stops short of explaining how the period interacts with the days default or how the per-course breakdown is shaped.

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 description coverage is 100% and both parameters are documented, so baseline is a 3. The description's mention of 'en un periodo' and 'del aula' loosely maps to days and classroom_id but adds no format, range, or default detail beyond 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?

States a specific verb and resource: totals of paid classroom sales over a period, plus per-course sold amounts. It is clear what data the tool returns, but it never distinguishes itself from the sibling aggregates list_sales and sales_funnel, so an agent must infer the boundary.

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 '[Administrador del aula]' tag implies the calling context and permission level, and 'en un periodo' implies the temporal-scope use case. There is no explicit when-to-use versus list_sales (detailed sales) or sales_funnel (conversion stages), leaving the agent to infer the choice.

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