get_unit_inspection_report

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full responsibility for behavioral disclosure. It only states 'Generates a report', implying a read-only operation but not explicitly confirming it. No information about effects, authentication, rate limits, or error handling is given.

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: the first directly states the purpose, and the second delivers critical usage guidance. It is front-loaded, succinct, and contains no unnecessary 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?

Given 5 parameters (including a nested object) and no output schema, the description is incomplete. It does not explain the report's content, column options, return format, or limitations. Important context like what happens with invalid IDs or empty results is missing.

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 100%, so the schema already documents all parameters. The description's note about numeric IDs is redundant with the schema descriptions (e.g., 'numeric strings, NOT property names'). The description adds no new parameter meaning beyond what the schema provides.

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 'Generates a report on unit inspections' clearly states the tool's purpose with a specific verb and resource. The name itself distinguishes it from many sibling report tools focused on other areas, though no explicit differentiation is provided.

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 includes an explicit note that all ID parameters must be numeric strings, not names, and advises using directory reports to look up IDs. This provides clear guidance on tool prerequisites and when to use alternative tools, covering both when and how to use it.

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