get_account_summary_report

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full behavioral disclosure burden. It discloses the HTTP method and endpoint, implying a read-only retrieval, but it does not state auth requirements, rate limits, or whether the path ID is effectively required despite the schema listing zero required parameters.

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?

Three short sentences front-load the purpose, then the endpoint, then parameter placement. Every sentence contributes and there is no filler, though the phrasing 'or include values in query' is slightly awkward.

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?

Core request construction is covered and an output schema exists, so return-value documentation is not required. However, the description never explains the body parameter, does not explicitly name the required path key, and gives no bridge to the sibling list tools that would supply the report ID.

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 coverage is 0% and the schema only provides untyped additionalProperties objects, so the description is the only real parameter documentation. It usefully assigns path_params to route IDs and query to filtering, pagination, sorting, and include values. It leaves body unexplained and does not enumerate exact query parameter names, but for a GET tool this is a modest gap.

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?

States a specific verb ('Get') and resource ('account summary report') and gives the exact REST endpoint. It clearly targets a single report by ID and is visually distinct from sibling list tools like list_account_summary_reports, though it does not explicitly name them.

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?

Explains how to structure the call: path_params for route IDs and query for filtering, pagination, sorting, and include values. However, it does not say when to prefer this over list_account_summary_reports or list_account_summary_reports_for_account, nor mention prerequisites such as obtaining the report ID first.

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