api.report

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries full responsibility for behavioral disclosure. It mentions 'live,' implying real-time data retrieval, but does not indicate whether the tool is read-only, what side effects occur, or any permissions or rate limits. The minimal phrase leaves significant behavioral traits unaddressed.

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 very concise, consisting of a single phrase. However, it is somewhat cryptic and lacks proper sentence structure. While brevity is good, the phrasing 'metadata surface' is not standard and reduces clarity. It is concise but not optimally structured.

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?

Given the absence of an output schema, the description must explain what the tool returns. It fails to do so—'metadata surface' is undefined. The description is insufficient for an agent to understand the tool's output or usage. Sibling tools like textures.report likely have similar brevity, but that does not excuse this gap.

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 tool has zero parameters, and the schema is empty. According to the rule, 0 parameters yields a baseline score of 4. The description does not need to add parameter information, so this score reflects the lack of need for additional semantics.

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 states 'Report live Blender API operator/type metadata surface,' which is vague and uses the generic verb 'Report.' It does not clearly specify what the tool does, nor does it distinguish itself from numerous sibling report tools (e.g., textures.report, tracking.report). The noun phrase 'metadata surface' is ambiguous.

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 provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives. There is no mention of prerequisites, context, or differentiation from other report tools. The description offers no help in deciding between api.report and other domain-specific report tools.

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