get_r_report_queries_problems_summary

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must disclose behavior. It only says 'Retrieve records' and the endpoint, implying a non-mutating operation, but does not describe any specific behavioral aspects, such as required authentication, pagination limits, or what data is returned. This is minimal and relies on the endpoint name.

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 concise, at two sentences, and front-loads the action. However, it is telegraphic and lacks detail, sacrificing substance for brevity. The structure is clear and immediately points to the endpoint.

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 tool's moderate complexity (4 parameters, output schema present) and the large sibling set, the description omits critical context: what the returned summary includes, how it relates to other summary tools, and any prerequisites. It is too terse to fully support correct invocation, although output schema may help.

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 0%, and the description only says to provide route IDs in path_params, filters and pagination in query, and headers in headers. It does not explain the meaning of each parameter or what values are expected, leaving the agent to infer from the endpoint name and schema.

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 states it retrieves records and provides the endpoint URL, which is a clear verb and resource. However, it does not explain what a 'problems summary' contains or how it differs from the many sibling report queries tools, leaving the purpose somewhat generic.

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?

It gives basic instructions on where to put parameters (path_params, query, headers), but provides no context on when to use this tool versus alternatives like get_r_report_queries_problems_info or get_r_report_queries_problems_summary_global. No explicit exclusions or alternatives are mentioned.

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