luceed_recent_sales_orders

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

With no annotations, the description carries the burden and does well: it discloses deduplication, the sort key (datum then broj, newest-first), and that output is truncated to `limit`. It does not cover auth requirements, rate limits, or what an order row contains, which is the remaining gap for a read tool with no output schema.

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?

Three sentences, front-loaded with the routing cue 'PREFERRED', then mechanics, then the anti-pattern. Every sentence earns its place; nothing is repeated from the schema.

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 five-parameter, no-output-schema tool with no annotations, the description covers the behavioral essentials an agent needs (dedupe, ordering, truncation, routing). It stops short of describing the returned order shape or any failure modes, which would have made it fully self-sufficient.

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 all five parameters are already documented, giving a baseline of 3. The description adds only marginal semantics (status + date window drive the fetch, and statuses can miss orders), without explaining precedence between days and from_date/to_date or the accepted date formats beyond the schema.

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 and resource ('Fetches NaloziProdaje') plus the exact user phrasing it serves ('last N sales orders / nalozi prodaje'), and explicitly contrasts itself with the sibling luceed_nalozi_prodaje. An agent can pick between the two without opening either schema.

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?

Gives an explicit positive selection rule ('PREFERRED for last N sales orders') and an explicit negative one ('Do NOT use raw luceed_nalozi_prodaje statusi'), with the reason (unsorted batches, single status missing recent orders). This is textbook 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.