investor_generate_report

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

No annotations provided, and the description does not disclose whether the tool performs side effects (likely read-only) or any behavioral constraints like rate limits or auth requirements. The output format is mentioned but no other behavioral context.

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 a single sentence, very concise, but lacks structure. It front-loads the purpose but omits critical details. Every word earns its place but more detail is needed.

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 5 parameters and no output schema, the description is severely incomplete. The agent needs to know acceptable values for report_type and format, date formatting, and how account_ids affect the report. The description fails to provide minimal context.

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%, and the description only vaguely references 'markdown or json' which maps to format but does not explain any parameter semantics. report_type, from_date, to_date, account_ids are entirely unexplained.

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 verb 'Generate' and resource 'portfolio report', and mentions output formats (markdown or json). It is distinct from sibling tools like investor_get_portfolio which likely returns raw data, but could be clearer on what type of report (e.g., performance).

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?

No guidance on when to use this tool vs alternatives like investor_get_portfolio or investor_analyze_portfolio. No explanation of report types or date ranges. The agent is left to infer usage.

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