report_list

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries full burden. It discloses that the tool returns reports filtered and sorted, and operates within the current project context. It does not explicitly state it is read-only, but the 'list' verb implies non-destructive behavior. The description adds value beyond the schema by explaining sorting and scoping.

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 two sentences, front-loaded with the core action and filters, then details about sorting. No extraneous words; every sentence adds value. It is appropriately concise for a list tool.

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 input schema covers all parameters and an output schema exists, the description provides necessary context: scope (current project), sorting (newest-first), and optional filters. It is complete for a straightforward listing tool with no additional behavioral complexity.

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 input schema has 100% coverage with descriptions for all four parameters. The description redundantly mentions filter options (author, topic, type) but does not add new details beyond the schema. For parameters with schema descriptions, the tool description adds marginal value, meeting the baseline of 3.

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 'list' and resource 'saved reports', with optional filters by author, topic, or type. This distinguishes it from sibling tools like report_read (for single report content) and report_save (for creation). The purpose is specific and unambiguous.

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 indicates when to use the tool (to list reports with optional filters) and implicitly separates it from other list tools via the resource. However, it lacks explicit guidance on when not to use it (e.g., for reading a specific report) or mention of alternative tools like report_read.

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