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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and destructiveHint=false, so safety is covered. The description adds meaningful behavioral context beyond that: the required Admin/permission level and the Cotlet API key access requirement, plus the row-based output framing.

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 first two sentences restate the same idea ("One of the built-in reports... as rows" / "Returns one of the reports... as rows"), which is redundant. The remaining sentences are informative and front-loaded, but the duplication costs efficiency.

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 all 4 params documented at 100% coverage and no output schema, the definition covers the essentials: required auth, report scope, and example report contents. It stops short of describing all report variants or row fields, but nothing critical for invoking the tool is missing.

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 100% (baseline 3), but the description adds semantic meaning to the report enum by explaining that sales_summary yields service/product quantities and sales totals per day and client_retention yields 90/180-day revisit counts. This clarifies enum values beyond the plain list in the schema, though only two of the seven reports are explained.

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+resource (get/retrieve a built-in report) and describes the return shape ("as rows") plus concrete report contents like Sales Summary and Client Retention. It is clear and self-contained, though it does not differentiate itself from other report-style siblings (e.g. booksy_get_report) since none exist within the Mangomint set.

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?

Gives permission context (Admin or Can access company reports) and API key requirements, but offers no explicit when-to-use vs alternative guidance or conditions selecting between the seven report types. Usage is only implied by the report descriptions.

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