get_category_performance

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It implies a read-only analysis operation ('Analyser'), but does not disclose what metrics are included (e.g., revenue, quantity), the return format, or whether it covers all categories. This is adequate but not rich.

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 two sentences: the first states purpose, the second gives usage context. It is concise, front-loaded with the action, and free of redundant details.

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 tool has one optional parameter and no output schema. The description explains purpose and use cases but does not mention what the response contains (e.g., categories with metrics) or any limitations. Given no annotations, this gap prevents a higher score.

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 100% (the only parameter 'period' has an enum, default, and description). The tool description adds no parameter-specific information, so it neither compensates nor improves beyond the schema. Baseline 3 applies.

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 function: analyzing sales and performance by category of cosmetic products. It uses a specific verb (analyser) and resource (sales/performance by category), distinguishing it from siblings like get_sales_period or get_revenue_trend which focus on overall sales or revenue trends.

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 gives explicit use cases: determining best-selling categories, adjusting supplier orders, and optimizing shelf space. It does not name alternative tools or exclusions, but the context is clear enough for an agent to know when to select this tool.

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