get_report

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

The description is straightforward, implying a read-only operation via the verb 'Get' and clearly stating what is returned. However, with no annotations, it does not explicitly confirm safety, permissions, or side effects, which would be helpful for full transparency.

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, front-loaded sentence that is entirely on-topic and contains no filler. It efficiently conveys the tool's purpose.

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 simple single-parameter interface and the presence of an output schema, the description covers the essentials. It could additionally point to related tools (e.g., 'use run_report to execute') or clarify the distinction from list_reports, but this is not strictly required.

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 includes report_id (integer) with no description. The description implicitly ties report_id to the report's definition, adding a little context, but it does not explain constraints, format, or defaults. Since there is only one self-explanatory parameter, the gap is minimal.

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 a specific verb ('Get') and resource ('report's definition') with details about what the definition includes (source sheets, columns, filters). This distinguishes it from sibling tools like run_report or list_reports.

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?

The description implies when to use this tool (when you need a report's structural definition) but provides no explicit exclusions or references to alternatives such as run_report or list_reports. The usage is inferable but not directly guided.

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