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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, and destructiveHint=false, covering safety. The description adds ordering and state filtering context, but does not disclose permissions, rate limits, or full return behavior. It adds some value beyond annotations but not rich detail.

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 short and front-loads the main idea, but it appears truncated (ends with '...'), leaving the thought incomplete. It is not verbose but lacks the structure to convey full meaning.

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 tool with two optional parameters and no output schema, the description should explain parameter usage and return behavior. It leaves key gaps: what 'builders' queue' means, how limit works, and what states are allowed. The truncation exacerbates incompleteness.

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 0%, so the description must compensate. It vaguely mentions the state parameter ('state filed or seen, or `state` to pick...') but does not explain valid values or what the limit parameter does. Coverage is partial and incomplete.

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 identifies a specific resource: 'The builders' queue of reports' and adds ordering ('oldest unanswered first'), which distinguishes it from siblings like report_answer or report_status. It implies a list operation without explicitly stating a verb, but the purpose is clear enough.

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 alternatives. It mentions the state parameter but does not explain when to choose this tool over others like report_status or report_answer.

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