sales_report

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden, but it only says 'Download' and lists content. It does not disclose output format, authentication requirements, rate limits, or any side effects. The 'Pro feature' note is a minor access constraint but insufficient for behavioral transparency.

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 three short sentences, front-loaded with the action and key content. No unnecessary words or repetition; it is concise and scannable.

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?

The description lacks usage context, return format, and behavioral caveats. With no output schema and no annotations, it should include more operational guidance (e.g., what the downloaded file looks like, when to use it, any prerequisites) to be complete.

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 description coverage is 100%, so the baseline is 3. The description adds no extra meaning to the parameters beyond what the schema already provides—it only mentions report content unrelated to parameter syntax or semantics.

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 'Download sales/downloads summary', identifying both a specific verb and resource. It lists the report contents (units, proceeds, territory), which distinguishes it from sibling tools focused on app management, reviews, or metadata.

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?

Description gives no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like daily_briefing or other reporting tools. 'Pro feature' is a licensing note, not a usage context. Schema provides vendor_number help, but the description lacks explicit when/when-not guidance.

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