get_report

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

With no annotations, the description carries full burden for behavioral disclosure. It only states it gets a report by ID, implying a read operation. It does not disclose any side effects, permissions needed, or return format (though an output schema may exist). The minimal description lacks transparency about expected behavior beyond the basic function.

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 one short sentence, which is concise. However, it is too minimal and could include more helpful information without being verbose. It is appropriately front-loaded but sacrifices substance for brevity.

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 (1 required param, no annotations, output schema exists), the description is incomplete. It does not explain what constitutes a report, how to obtain report IDs, or how this tool differs from the sibling tools. The agent lacks context to confidently use or combine this tool with others.

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?

Schema description coverage is 0%, so the description must compensate. It adds only that the report is fetched 'by ID', which is already implied by the parameter name 'report_id'. No additional meaning, constraints, or formatting guidance is provided for the parameter.

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 action (Get) and the resource (a specific report) and the identifier (by ID). It is a specific verb+resource combination. However, it does not distinguish this tool from many other get_* siblings, such as get_document or get_contact, which follow the same pattern. A score of 4 is appropriate as it is clear but lacks differentiation.

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?

There is no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like list_reports or other get_* tools. No context is provided about prerequisites, typical scenarios, or exclusions. The description is purely about what it does, not when to invoke it.

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