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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint and idempotentHint, and the description adds substantive behavioral detail beyond them: the SQL is sanitized and a restricted viewer receives per-statement hashes instead, mirroring the dashboard. It does not cover error behavior for an unknown id or result-size limits.

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 compact sentences, front-loaded with the payload and followed by the sibling contrast and the sanitization caveat. 'Read-only' mildly duplicates the readOnlyHint annotation but is a reasonable at-a-glance cue rather than padding.

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, the description carries the burden of describing return content and does so: run detail, per-statement results, sanitized SQL or hashes for restricted viewers. Remaining gaps (pagination, empty/error cases) are modest for a single-resource read tool.

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 coverage is 0% for the single report_id parameter, so the schema documents only its UUID format and not its origin. The phrase 'One CI run's detail' hints that the id selects a specific run report, but the description never says where that id comes from (list_reports) or what happens when it is invalid.

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 precisely what is returned: a single CI run's detail plus per-statement results, and explicitly contrasts with list_reports, which returns the collection. An agent can distinguish show_report from list_reports and show_rule without opening any schema.

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 parenthetical '(list_reports lists them)' implicitly routes the agent to the listing tool when it needs enumeration, but there is no explicit when-to-use/when-not statement or mention that a report_id must first be obtained from list_reports.

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