Daily sales summary

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It mentions the summary components but does not reveal whether the tool is read-only, how daily aggregation works, what date range behavior applies, or what the response structure looks like. This is a significant gap for a tool that likely returns a report.

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 a single, concise phrase that conveys the essential purpose without unnecessary words. It is front-loaded and every element adds value, making it highly efficient.

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 report tool with two parameters and no output schema, the description adequately states the core functionality and components. However, it lacks details about the response format, aggregation level (e.g., per-day vs. total), and any filtering behavior, which would be helpful given the absence of annotations and output schema.

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?

Both parameters are described in the schema with format and defaults, so schema coverage is 100%. The tool description adds context about the summary contents but does not provide additional parameter-specific semantics beyond what the schema already offers, so the baseline score of 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?

The description clearly identifies the resource (daily sales summary) and specifies its contents (count, tax, coupon, shipping), making it easy to understand what the tool does. It is specific enough to be distinguished from sibling tools, but it lacks an explicit verb such as 'retrieve' or 'list', relying on the title for the action.

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 intended usage is implied by the name and description: if you need a daily sales summary, use this tool. However, there is no explicit guidance on when to use it versus alternatives, nor any exclusions for cases where other tools might be more appropriate.

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