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

readOnlyHint=true already establishes the safety profile, so the bar is lower. The description adds real context beyond the annotation: it scopes the result to the account's saved reports and reveals the returned fields, which matters because no output schema exists.

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 fragments, front-loaded with the action, followed by the routing hint and endpoint. Every clause earns its place with no waste.

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 no-param read tool with an empty schema and no output schema, the description supplies the missing return-shape information (report_id and name) and the follow-up tool. Sufficient, though it does not mention ordering or whether the list can be empty.

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?

The tool takes zero parameters, so the baseline is 4; there is no parameter syntax the description could meaningfully add.

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?

Specific verb (list) plus resource (account's saved reports), and it even names the returned fields (report_id and name). It is clearly distinguishable from chargeover_get_report and chargeover_run_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?

Explicitly routes the agent: to run a report, use chargeover_run_report. This names the alternative and the condition selecting it, leaving nothing to inference for a list-then-run workflow.

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