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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and destructiveHint=false, so the safety profile is clear. The description adds the account-level scope and optional filtering, but does not disclose additional behavioral details such as pagination defaults, result ordering, or whether reports and dashboards are returned together or separately.

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 one concise, front-loaded sentence with no wasted words. It states the action, the resource, the account scope, and the optional filter without repeating schema details.

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 simple read-only list tool, the description, combined with full schema coverage and an output schema, is mostly sufficient. The main gap is the absence of explicit guidance about when to prefer this tool over sibling listing tools, but that is more of a usage-guideline concern than a completeness failure.

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%, and the description only restates the client filter already documented in the schema. It adds no new meaning about parameter values, defaults, or how pagination parameters interact with the filter.

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 states a specific action and resource: listing reports and dashboards for the account, with an optional client filter. This distinguishes it from most sibling tools by the object type, though it does not explicitly contrast with closely related list_assets or get_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 description implies when to use the tool: when you need account-level reports or dashboards, optionally scoped to a client. However, it provides no explicit alternatives or when-not-to-use guidance, which would be helpful given the large number of sibling list_* tools.

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