get_top_products

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

With no annotations, the description carries full transparency burden. It discloses that the tool scans all orders in the range (performance implication) and only includes sold products. It doesn't mention read-only status explicitly, but the behavior is consistent with a read-only ranking tool and no side effects are implied.

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?

Two concise sentences: first states what the tool does, second states exclusions and directs to an alternative. Every word serves a purpose, and the structure front-loads the core purpose.

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 description covers purpose, exclusions, and performance considerations for a 5-parameter tool with no output schema. It does not explicitly describe the return structure (e.g., product fields), but the tool name and ranking nature make this somewhat predictable, and the performance warning adds valuable context.

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%, so baseline is 3. The description adds no extra parameter-level detail beyond the schema, though it reinforces the role of sort_by and mentions date-range performance in the start_date description within the schema itself. The tool description itself does not add new parameter meaning.

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 gets a product sales ranking for a specified time range, sorted by quantity or revenue. It distinguishes itself from related tools by explicitly excluding unsold/slow-moving items and pointing to get_slow_movers as the alternative.

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?

Provides explicit usage context: use for ranking products that have been sold, and explicitly directs users to get_slow_movers for unsold or low-moving items. Also includes performance guidance to keep date ranges short, helping agents decide how to invoke the tool efficiently.

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