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

Annotations flag destructiveHint=true and openWorldHint=true, and the description adds value beyond them by disclosing the credential requirement (SULVO_API_KEY with reports:write scope) and the out-of-band email delivery model. It does not say whether overwriting an existing report (via reportId) is reversible or what gets replaced, a gap for a destructive tool.

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?

Three short sentences, front-loaded with the core action, followed by the credential requirement and a critical delivery note. Every sentence carries information an agent needs.

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?

No output schema, but the description compensates by explaining delivery is by email (no inline return). For a 15-parameter destructive-ish tool with only 47% schema coverage, more parameter detail would help, but the operational essentials (auth, mode, delivery) are present.

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 47%, so roughly half the 15 parameters (name, start/end, adRoots, domains, outputFormat, utmHourlyBreakdown, etc.) are undocumented in both schema and description. The description names key axes (report type, immediate vs scheduled) but does not compensate for the undocumented parameters.

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 precise verb (Create/update) plus the resource (Sulvo advanced report) and enumerates the three report kinds (adUnit, dimensions, customData), which maps directly to the reportType enum. Clearly distinguishable from siblings like delete_sulvo_advanced_report and get_sulvo_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?

Explains the two operating modes (run immediately/emailed vs recurring schedule) and notes delivery is by email rather than inline, which tells the agent what to expect. It does not explicitly name an alternative sibling or state when not to use this tool, but the context is clear enough to choose correctly.

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