get_turnover

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

With no annotations provided, the description must carry the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It only adds 'Sums in RUBLES.' and the return components, but lacks any statement about read-only safety, side effects, or pagination behavior. The date-range scope is implied but not explicitly linked to 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 a single concise sentence, front-loaded with the verb and resource. Every word adds value—no filler, no redundancy.

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 tool has no output schema and no annotations, so the description must cover return values and context. It explains the main output fields and currency, but leaves ambiguity about whether turnover is for all products or a specific product, and does not describe limit/offset behavior. Adequate for a simple query but with clear gaps.

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 the baseline is 3. The description's 'over a period' hints at moment_from/moment_to but does not add meaningful detail beyond the schema definitions. No parameter-level semantics are enriched 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?

The description clearly states the tool fetches product turnover over a period and lists the components (opening, income, outcome, closing). It is specific and uses a clear verb+resource, though it does not explicitly differentiate from similar reporting tools like get_profit_report or get_sales_report.

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 phrase 'over a period' implies it is for time-based turnover reporting, but there is no explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as get_stock or get_profit_report, nor any exclusions or prerequisites.

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