sales_report

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

The description lacks behavioral details such as whether the operation is read-only, if it triggers any side effects, or what permissions are needed. The 'Pro feature' note hints at access requirements but is insufficient. Without annotations, more detail is expected.

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 very short (one sentence) which is concise, but at the expense of necessary detail. It could be restructured to front-load the core action and then add a sentence on parameters or output.

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?

Given the tool has 3 parameters, one required, and no output schema, the description is incomplete. It does not explain what the downloaded file contains (beyond a summary), the behavior of different frequencies, or the date format. This is insufficient for reliable tool invocation.

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%, so the baseline is 3. The description adds some context by mentioning 'units, proceeds, territory,' which are not in the schema, but it does not explain how the parameters (vendor_number, frequency, report_date) affect the output.

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 downloads a sales/downloads summary and shows units, proceeds, and territory. It distinguishes from siblings like competitor_snapshot or keyword_insights by specifying its focus on financial data. However, the term 'summary' is a bit vague, and 'Pro feature' hints at access restrictions.

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 guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives. There is no mention of typical use cases, prerequisites, or scenarios where another sibling tool 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.