QMetry: Export HTML Report

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

Annotations already declare idempotentHint=true and destructiveHint=false, covering the main safety profile. The description adds 'via the backend', 'downloadable', and an 'Expected Output' line saying a report file is generated and returned, but it does not disclose storage, overwrite behavior, permissions, or response format beyond that. This is adequate but not rich.

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 purpose is front-loaded, and the description is organized into scannable sections (Parameters, Use Cases, Examples, Hints). Some content repeats the schema, but the example and use-case guidance earn their place without making the description unwieldy.

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 simple 3-parameter tool with no output schema, the description covers what the tool does, when to use it, what to provide, and roughly what to expect ('Report file generated and returned by the backend'). It could specify the exact response format or file delivery mechanism, but nothing needed to invoke the tool correctly is missing.

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 100%, so the baseline is 3. The description adds value with a concrete JSON example, clarifies that htmlContent must be the complete HTML string, and reinforces the fileName constraints (no extension, no path separators), helping an agent construct valid arguments.

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 opening sentence states a specific verb ('Export'), a clear resource ('HTML content'), and an outcome ('a downloadable report file via the backend'). It is unambiguous and distinct from the QMetry sibling tools, and the hint that it is typically called after 'Execute Quality Gate Report' further clarifies its role.

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 provides three concrete use cases and a hint about when to call it ('Typically called after generating report content from Execute Quality Gate Report results'). It gives clear context but does not explicitly state when not to use this tool or name an alternative export tool, so it stops short of a 5.

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