alterios_create_report_tab

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

No annotations provided, so description bears full burden. It mentions 'plan or apply' and 'dry_run' parameter implies testing mode, but doesn't explain behavior when dry_run is false or what side effects occur (e.g., creation, modification). Output schema exists but is not detailed.

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 but lacks structure. It attempts to pack multiple concepts ('plan or apply', 'report plus openId form tab scenario') but sacrifices clarity. Could be improved with clear segmentation.

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 high complexity (22 parameters, no schema descriptions, no annotations), the description is severely incomplete. It fails to cover the tool's purpose, usage, or parameter roles, leaving the agent unable to invoke it correctly.

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 descriptions are absent (0% coverage) and the tool description adds no parameter explanations. With 22 parameters, including required ones like source_view_id, target_form_id, and report_name, the agent has no clues on their meaning or usage.

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 'Plan or apply a report plus openId form tab scenario backed by a Project Database source view' is vague and does not differentiate this tool from siblings like alterios_upsert_report or alterios_patch_form_tabs. It fails to specify the primary action (create a tab) and only mentions 'plan or apply' without clarity.

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. The description provides no context about prerequisites, typical use cases, or exclusions. With many sibling tools, the agent cannot determine appropriate usage.

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