toast_get_item_sales_report

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden but only states 'Get sales report for menu items.' It doesn't disclose behavior like default date ranges, limit handling, required restaurant context, or whether the operation is read-only, which is especially important because all five parameters are optional.

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 single sentence is concise and front-loaded, with no redundant wording. However, it is under-specified for a five-parameter report tool, so the brevity comes at the expense of useful content.

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 tool with five optional parameters, no output schema, and no annotations, one vague sentence is grossly insufficient. An agent cannot determine what inputs are meaningful, what the report contains, or what response to expect.

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 only 20% and the description adds no parameter information; startDate, endDate, businessDate, and restaurantGuid have empty schema descriptions and are not mentioned at all. The description fails to compensate for the low schema coverage.

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 uses a direct verb + resource construction ('Get sales report for menu items') and identifies the specific report type, which helps distinguish it from sibling tools like toast_get_discount_report and toast_get_sales_summary. However, it doesn't clarify date scope or what the report contains, so it is clear but not fully differentiated.

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 given about when to prefer this tool over toast_get_sales_summary, toast_get_hourly_sales, or other reporting siblings. An agent is left to infer context from the tool name alone.

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