Get a single report

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden and does disclose a genuinely non-obvious access-control behavior: private/internal reports expose only metadata unless the server has a session cookie. It does not cover not-found behavior or error responses, but the disclosure of restricted-visibility handling is substantive and cannot be inferred from structured fields.

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, zero waste, with the payload contents front-loaded and the visibility caveat as the closing qualifier. Nothing is repeated from the title or schema.

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 one-parameter read tool with no output schema and no annotations, the description compensates well by enumerating the returnable fields and flagging the metadata-only case. The only gap is failure behavior (nonexistent id, unauthorized access), which an agent would likely want before calling.

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?

There is a single parameter with 100% schema description coverage, including its provenance ('as returned by list_reports') and positive-integer bound, so the schema does the heavy lifting. The description only restates 'by id' and adds no format or resolution guidance beyond it.

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?

States a specific verb and resource ('Details of one BI.ZONE report by id') and enumerates the fields returned (researcher, program, asset, payout, visibility, dates). The 'one ... by id' framing makes it clearly distinct from the list_reports sibling without needing the schema.

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?

Usage is only implied: the id comes from list_reports (stated in the schema, not the description). The description does add a real access condition — private/internal reports return metadata only unless a session cookie is configured — but it never says when to prefer this over list_reports or what to do when a lookup is not permitted.

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