Reports_getReportDocument

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It only states it 'runs in your Kuudo deployment, not here' and returns 'information required for retrieving' contents, without explaining auth needs, execution environment implications, return shape, or any side effects. The deployment remark is vague and potentially misleading.

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 short and scannable, but 'Catalog entry' is unhelpful filler, and 'Runs in your Kuudo deployment, not here' is ambiguous rather than informative. It earns points for brevity, not for tightly earned content.

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 tool with no output schema and no annotations, the description is too thin for an agent to call it correctly. It does not explain how to use the returned information, what parameters or path variables might be required, or how this step fits into the broader report workflow.

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?

The input schema declares zero parameters, so there is nothing the description must clarify beyond the baseline. However, additionalProperties is true, and the description does not mention expected identifiers such as a report document ID, which could matter in practice.

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 phrase 'Returns the information required for retrieving a report document's contents' gives a recognizable verb-object-resource, but 'Catalog entry' and 'Runs in your Kuudo deployment, not here' muddy whether the tool is actually executable in this environment. It does not distinguish itself from Reports_getReport or Reports_getReports beyond the name.

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 guidance is given about when to call this tool, what prerequisites exist, or how it relates to siblings like Reports_getReport, Reports_getReports, or Reports_createReport. The description implies a document-fetching role but leaves the workflow entirely to the agent.

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