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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and openWorldHint=false, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds the environment/auth requirement (API key with reports:read scope), which is genuinely useful beyond annotations, but says nothing about pagination, result limits, or ordering for a listing operation.

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 short sentences, purpose front-loaded and the auth requirement second. No filler or repetition.

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?

With no output schema and a single optional param, the definition covers purpose and auth prerequisites adequately, but omits anything about how results are paginated, limited, or formatted, which matters for a list tool whose only knob is outputFormat.

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?

There is one optional parameter (outputFormat with an enum of markdown/json/csv and a default), and schema description coverage is 0%. The description never mentions the output format control, so the schema is left to carry it entirely and the description adds nothing here.

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?

States a specific verb (List) and resource (saved Sulvo advanced reports) scoped to the account. This cleanly separates it from save_sulvo_advanced_report and delete_sulvo_advanced_report, though it does not explicitly contrast with get_sulvo_report or get_sulvo_advanced_report if one exists.

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 a prerequisite (SULVO_API_KEY with reports:read scope) which is useful context, but gives no when-to-use guidance and names no alternative sibling such as get_sulvo_report for retrieving a single report.

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