Run curated report

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, destructiveHint=false and a closed world, so the safety profile is fully covered by structured data. The description adds no behavioral context of its own: no note on cost/latency of running a report, no indication of what happens if the name is unknown, and no mention of result size behavior despite the max_rows cap.

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 short sentences, zero filler, with the action stated first and the discovery prerequisite second. Nothing could be removed without losing information.

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?

For a simple read-only tool with no output schema, the description covers the core invocation path, but the undocumented max_rows parameter and the absence of any hint about the returned result shape leave gaps. It is adequate rather than complete.

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 67%: name and params are documented in the schema, but max_rows has no description anywhere. The description adds one genuinely useful pointer — that report parameters are report-specific and discoverable via list_reports — but it does not explain max_rows or the params format beyond what the schema already gives.

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 and resource ('Run a curated report by name'), which is precise enough to separate it from the ad-hoc run_query sibling. It does not explicitly contrast itself with run_query, so the agent must infer that 'curated' means pre-defined rather than arbitrary SQL.

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?

Explicitly directs the agent to list_reports as the discovery step for both report names and their parameters, which is the key prerequisite for calling this tool. It gives no exclusion guidance (e.g. when to prefer run_query instead), but the positive workflow is clear.

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