toast_get_sales_summary

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

With no annotations, the description must carry the behavioral disclosure burden, but it only says the summary is 'comprehensive.' It does not state return contents, read-only semantics, pagination, restaurant scoping, or aggregation behavior. No contradiction exists, but transparency is minimal.

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, clearly worded sentence with no filler and is effectively front-loaded. The vague 'comprehensive' and lack of structure prevent a 5, but the length is appropriate for the limited 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?

Without an output schema or annotations, the description needs to explain more about what the summary contains, how restaurantGuid affects results, and how this tool relates to other report tools. It currently leaves an agent guessing whether this is the right report among many siblings.

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 schema already documents businessDate's YYYYMMDD format, and the description adds no parameter-level meaning. The optional restaurantGuid has an empty schema description and is not mentioned in the description, leaving half the parameters effectively undocumented.

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 specific verb ('Get') and resource ('comprehensive sales summary') and scopes it by business date, making the core purpose clear. It is distinguishable from most siblings, though 'comprehensive' is vague about what exactly is included.

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 on when to use this tool versus the many report siblings such as get_hourly_sales, get_item_sales_report, or get_payment_type_report. The only usage context is the business date scoping; there are no alternatives or exclusions.

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