get_report

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full behavioral burden, yet it discloses almost nothing: no mention of auth requirements, cost, whether it performs writes or triggers a sync, or how 'days' shapes the output. The only behavioral hint is the Markdown output format, and the output schema already covers the return shape.

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?

A single front-loaded line with no filler; every token names a section of the report. It is efficient, though so compressed that it reads as a fragment rather than a directive.

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?

An output schema exists, so return values need not be explained, but the description still omits the purpose of the days parameter and any routing guidance versus siblings. For a tool with one documented-only-in-schema input, that leaves meaningful gaps.

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% for the single 'days' parameter (default 14), and the description never explains it. Mentioning '7-day means' arguably hints at a fixed window inside the report, but the relationship to the days argument is left entirely unstated.

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 names the resource (a report) and enumerates its contents (today's card, daily table, workouts, 7-day means), which distinguishes it from siblings like get_daily and get_workouts that return single data streams. However it is a noun fragment with no explicit verb, so the 'what it does' is inferred rather than stated.

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?

No when-to-use guidance at all. It never says to prefer this over get_daily/get_workouts when a consolidated digest is wanted, nor does it name any alternative or exclusion. The agent must guess its place among eight siblings.

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