hotmart_sales_history_list

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must fully disclose behavioral traits. However, it only says 'Sales History' and gives an example, omitting details like pagination behavior, authentication requirements, rate limits, or the nature of the response. This is insufficient for a tool with 14 optional parameters.

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 extremely concise with only two sentences and an example. Every part serves a purpose: stating what it does, giving a usage example, and providing an exclusion. No wasted words.

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?

Despite having an output schema (not shown) and full parameter documentation in the schema, the description lacks essential contextual information such as how pagination works with page_token, the format of dates (though partially in param description), or what the response contains. For a complex tool with 14 parameters, more context is needed beyond the schema.

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%, meaning all parameters have descriptions in the schema. The tool description does not add significant meaning beyond the schema; it only provides a usage example. Baseline of 3 is appropriate.

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 'Sales History' and provides an example of usage. It distinguishes itself from the sibling tool `hotmart_sales_summary_list` by specifying when not to use it (for aggregated metrics), making the purpose very clear.

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?

The description explicitly advises against using this tool for aggregated metrics and directs the user to `hotmart_sales_summary_list` instead, providing clear when-to-use and when-not-to-use guidance.

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