get_tenant_directory_report

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must disclose behavioral traits. It only mentions the ID format requirement and says nothing about authorization needs, performance implications, error behavior, or any other interactions beyond parameter formatting.

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: first states the purpose, second delivers the key caveat. It is concise, front-loaded, and contains no extraneous words.

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?

The tool has 5 parameters, nested objects, two enums, and no output schema. The description does not explain return type, format, or what the enums mean. Given the complexity, more contextual detail is needed to fully inform the agent.

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 schema has 0% description coverage, so the description must compensate. It adds the critical clarification that IDs are numeric strings, but fails to explain other parameters like tenant_visibility, columns, or the nested object structure. It adds value but not for all parameters.

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 returns a tenant directory report for given filters. It uses a specific verb ('returns') and resource ('tenant directory report'), which distinguishes it from the many sibling report tools.

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 warns that all ID parameters must be numeric strings, not names, and advises to use respective directory reports to look up IDs. This provides clear when-to-use guidance for parameter preparation, though it does not explicitly contrast with alternatives.

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