save_report_html

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full transparency burden. It discloses the key behavioral trait of base64 embedding and the auto-replacement of plot references, and demonstrates with an example. It lacks details on edge cases like missing plot files or output_dir behavior, but the core behavior is well-transparent.

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 description is concise and well-structured. It front-loads the main purpose, adds differentiation, explains syntax, and provides an example—all in a compact, high-signal format. Every sentence adds value.

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?

Given the tool's moderate complexity, the description is complete: it covers purpose, alternatives, usage syntax, and behavior. The output schema exists, so return value details are not required. The description leaves no major gaps for an agent to misuse the 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 description coverage is 0%, so the description must add parameter meaning. It clarifies 'content' as markdown content through the example, explains 'include_plots' as a list of plot names to embed, and shows how they interconnect. However, 'output_dir' is left to name inference, which is a minor gap.

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?

The description clearly states the tool's function: 'Save a data science report as an HTML file with embedded plot images (base64).' It uses a specific verb ('save') and resource ('data science report as an HTML file'), and explicitly distinguishes itself from the sibling tool save_report ('Unlike save_report (markdown + separate PNGs), this produces a single self-contained HTML file').

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 description explicitly provides guidance on when to use this tool versus the alternative save_report, stating the difference in output format. It also explains how to reference plots and includes a concrete example, making the usage context clear.

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