feegow_list_sales

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

No annotations provided, so description carries full burden. It mentions HTTP GET, implying read-only, but does not disclose behavioral traits such as authorization requirements, rate limits, page size, or what happens if no results. Minimal transparency beyond the basic request type.

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?

Single sentence with the department label front-loaded, concise and efficient. However, it could include more useful detail without becoming verbose.

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?

No output schema exists, but description does not hint at return value structure. For a list tool with 5 parameters and no output schema, the description should indicate what the response contains (e.g., list of sales with fields). Also, it has a nested 'query' parameter that could be clarified. Incomplete for practical use.

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 has 100% description coverage for all five parameters (date_start, date_end, amount, unidade_id, query), so schema already explains each parameter. Description adds no additional meaning beyond what the schema provides. Baseline 3 is appropriate.

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?

Description clearly states it retrieves sales information based on period and filters. The verb 'Obtém' (Gets) and resource 'informações de vendas' (sales information) are specific. The sibling list includes many tools, but this one is distinct for sales data, not confused with invoices or other lists.

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?

No explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like feegow_list_invoices. The description implies date-range filtering but does not state prerequisites, exclusions, or situations where another tool would be preferable.

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