overview_sla

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

No annotations exist, so the description carries the full burden. It does add real behavioral context: the `reports:manage` permission requirement and a GET endpoint that implies a safe read. It says nothing, however, about what is returned, whether the data is scoped to the caller's workspace, or how the SLA is computed.

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?

Short and front-loaded with the verb, but three of four lines are generated boilerplate (raw path and tags) that add no decision-relevant information. It is under-specified rather than padded, so length is not the problem.

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?

With no output schema and no annotations, the description is the only source of return-value information, and it supplies none. For an analytics endpoint whose output shape an agent cannot infer, this leaves the definition materially incomplete.

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 single `days` parameter is fully documented in the schema (default 0, clamped 0-365, query parameter), so coverage is 100%. The description adds nothing about the parameter or its effect on the returned SLA window, which is the baseline expectation when the schema already does the work.

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?

"Get Overview SLA" restates the tool name almost verbatim and never says what an SLA overview actually contains (response-time targets? compliance rates? per-agent breakdown?). An agent comparing it to siblings like overview_csat or overview_counts has nothing to distinguish it beyond the word "SLA".

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 when-to-use guidance, no exclusions, and no routing to or away from the other overview_* siblings. The only implied usage is that this is a reporting endpoint, which the agent could guess from the name alone.

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