get_model_report

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

Discloses default summary response (token-efficient) and full_report behavior. Lacks explicit statement about read-only nature or any side effects, but no contradictions. Adequate given absence of annotations.

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?

Four well-structured sentences with key information front-loaded. No redundancy, uses code formatting for optional params. Every sentence adds value.

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?

Covers all essential behaviors: parameter defaults, optionality, and response toggling. Output schema handles return structure, so description's coverage is sufficient for proper 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?

All four parameters are explained beyond the schema: model_id is required, project_id resolved from model_id, model_version_id defaults to latest, full_report defaults to false. This compensates for the 0% schema coverage.

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?

Clearly states it loads the EDA training report with metrics, feature analysis, and performance summary. Distinguishes from siblings like get_model and get_model_version by specifying the specialized report content.

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?

Provides clear guidance on optional parameters: project_id can be omitted (resolved from model_id), model_version_id defaults to latest, full_report toggles detail level. However, no explicit when-not-to-use or comparison with sibling tools.

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