get_sales_agent_actions

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the burden of behavioral disclosure. The description mentions it returns both actions and summary stats, which is useful. However, it doesn't describe the return format, pagination behavior, whether it covers only one sales agent or all agents, or any timezone considerations for 'today'. It's 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 a single, tightly-written sentence that conveys the tool's purpose and the key data points it returns without any waste. Every element serves a purpose.

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 0 parameters, no output schema, and no annotations, the description is the only source of information. It covers what data is returned but not the format, structure, or detail level. Given the simplicity of a no-arg fetch tool, this is fairly complete, but it could note whether the summary stats are the primary output or if individual actions are also returned in detail.

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?

The tool has 0 parameters, so there is nothing to document. With zero params, the baseline is 4. The description doesn't need to add parameter documentation since there are none.

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 what the tool does: fetches today's AI sales agent actions and summary stats (total actions, deals closed, flagged for human review). It has a specific verb (fetch), resource (sales agent actions), and scope (today's). It distinguishes reasonably from siblings like get_autopilot_status and get_sales_agent_config, though it doesn't explicitly differentiate itself.

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 'today's' scoping gives clear context about what data is returned, which helps an agent decide whether this is the right tool for time-bound queries. However, it doesn't explicitly say when to use it vs alternatives like get_autopilot_status or get_sales_agent_config, nor does it mention any exclusions or prerequisites.

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