Preview report edits

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

The description contradicts the annotations: readOnlyHint=true suggests no state modifications, but 'populate an editable Draft or Returned report' implies modifying the report's preview state. This is a clear annotation contradiction, and the description does not add any additional behavioral context beyond this.

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?

Two sentences with no wasted words. The first sentence states the purpose, the second provides critical usage guidance. Each sentence earns its place.

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 4 parameters, low schema coverage, no output schema, and nested objects, the description is somewhat complete but lacks information about return values, error cases, or permissions. The agent can use it for basic understanding but may need additional context for safe invocation.

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 only 25%, so the description must compensate. It adds important semantics: fieldValues keys must come from camcors_get_editable_report, and groups replace the full list using aggregate minutes. For allowNoGroups, the schema already provides a description. Overall, significant added value for two key 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 'populate[s] an editable Draft or Returned report without saving it', specifying the verb 'populate' and the resource type. This distinguishes it from sibling tools like camcors_save_report_edit (which saves) and camcors_discard_report_preview (which discards).

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 provides explicit prerequisites: 'fieldValues keys must come from camcors_get_editable_report' and 'groups replace the full timing-group list and use aggregate minutes for each supervision group size.' It implies the tool is for previewing edits without saving, but no explicit when-not or alternative mentions.

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