expensify_create_report

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

Beyond annotations, the description discloses that the report is created in an unsubmitted state, that the API cannot submit/approve, and that a dry-run is currently preventing actual writes. These add significant 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 three sentences with clear structure, but includes a line break that could be smoothed. It is efficient and contains no extraneous information.

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 tool with nested objects and no output schema, the description covers key aspects: return value, state, and temporary dry-run. It is sufficient for an agent to understand the tool's effect, though error handling is not covered.

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% with descriptions for all parameters. The description adds value by clarifying amount units (cents) and date format, but this is partially redundant with schema pattern and type constraints.

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 creates an expense report on a policy, optionally attaching expenses, and returns the reportID. This distinguishes it from sibling tools like expensify_create_expenses.

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 gives context about the unsubmitted state and dry-run, but does not explicitly instruct when to use this tool versus alternatives like expensify_create_expenses. Usage guidance is implied but not explicit.

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