get_full_report

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. It adds useful context that report_type depends on entity type and silo_id, and clarifies it's a single-entity fetch. However, it does not disclose response format, error behavior, or any potential side effects, leaving gaps.

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 two short sentences, front-loaded with the core purpose and followed by essential usage guidance. No filler, every sentence earns its place.

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 two-parameter tool with no output schema, the description covers the necessary invocation steps and prerequisite dependencies. It omits explicit return format or error cases, but the name and 'detailed report' convey the basic output expectation adequately.

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 coverage is 0%, but the description compensates by explaining that regon is the entity identifier and report_type should be selected from list_report_types(). This gives meaningful meaning to both parameters beyond their bare string types, though it doesn't specify exact formats.

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 uses a specific verb and resource: 'Fetch a detailed REGON report for one entity by REGON.' This clearly differentiates it from sibling search tools and list_report_types, and states exactly what the tool does.

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?

It explicitly tells the user to choose report_type from list_report_types() based on the entity's type and silo_id returned by a search, establishing a clear usage workflow. It doesn't explicitly state when not to use it, but the prerequisite and selection guidance are strong.

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