report_vendite_prodotti

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

With no annotations, the description carries the burden. It usefully discloses a non-obvious behavioral trait: the never-sold list covers the entire store history rather than the selected periodo. However it does not state the read-only nature explicitly, the currency/rounding of net revenue, result size, or whether the report is expensive to compute.

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, front-loaded with what the report contains, followed by the constrained parameter values. No filler; the parenthetical about full store history earns its place by clarifying scope.

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 one-parameter report with no output schema and no annotations, the description covers the return payload (quantities, net revenue, zero-sales products) and the parameter domain. Missing only marginal details such as currency and how period boundaries are applied.

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 single `periodo` parameter has 0% schema coverage and no enum in the schema, so the description's enumeration of the four allowed values is essential and fully compensates. It omits only that the default is "1_mese", which the schema already declares.

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+resource (sales report per product) and enumerates the contents: best sellers with quantity and net revenue, plus published-but-never-sold products. An agent can tell this is an analytics/report tool rather than a listing tool like lista_prodotti, though no sibling is named explicitly.

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?

Usage is only implied by the nature of the tool — asking for a sales report. There is no statement of when to prefer this over lista_prodotti or lista_ordini, nor of any prerequisites (e.g. whether orders must exist, or whether the store must be connected).

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