reporter-execute

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

Annotations already signal destructive and non-idempotent behavior. The description adds context about non-trivial request requirements (multipart, X-Idempotency, binary download) that go beyond annotations, informing the agent of potential complexities without overclaiming safety.

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 sentences: the first states the core purpose directly, the second delivers a crucial usage directive. No filler or repetition of schema details; every sentence earns its place.

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 generic executor with many parameters and no output schema, the description points to reporter-discover for detailed requirements, covering the most complex behaviors. It doesn't enumerate all actions or return values, but the schema and annotations fill those gaps adequately.

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 provides detailed descriptions for all 9 parameters, including action, resource, multipart, headers, and confirmation fields. The description only briefly mentions multipart and headers, adding minimal value over the schema, so the baseline of 3 applies.

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 clearly states the tool executes Reporter manager API actions, with a specific verb ('Execute') and resource ('Reporter manager API'). It distinguishes itself from reporter-discover by framing itself as the execution counterpart, though it doesn't enumerate specific actions beyond the broad category.

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?

The description explicitly instructs to use reporter-discover first to inspect multipart requirements, headers, and download behavior, which sets clear prerequisites. It does not name alternative tools but implies the discover-execute pairing for this domain.

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