lattice.report

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

The description implies a read-only operation ('report'), but no behavioral details are provided, such as whether it requires specific permissions or if it has side effects. Since no annotations exist, the description fails to disclose traits beyond the basic verb.

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 a single sentence, which is concise and front-loaded. However, it is too terse and lacks structure (e.g., bullet points or sections) that could improve readability for an agent.

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 simplicity of the tool (one parameter, no output schema), the description is incomplete. It does not explain what information is returned (e.g., a list of properties, current values), which is critical for a 'report' tool.

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 has one parameter 'object' with 0% coverage in the description. The description does not refer to the parameter at all; the schema's title 'Lattice object to inspect' provides some meaning, but the tool description adds no additional semantics or usage details.

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 specifies the tool reports lattice object, data, and point state. It is a clear verb+resource that distinguishes it from sibling report tools for other object types, but it does not specify what 'report' entails (e.g., reading properties vs. listing).

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 on when to use this tool versus alternatives like mesh.report or rig.report. There is no context about prerequisites or conditions for use.

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