list_reports

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

With no annotations, the description carries the burden of behavioral disclosure. 'List' implies a read-only operation and 'with performance stats' hints at the return content, but it does not explain sorting, default ordering, or what specific stats are included. This is minimal but not misleading.

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 of six words, with no filler. It front-loads the key information and every word contributes to the 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?

For a simple list tool with only two well-documented pagination parameters, the description is adequate but leaves gaps. It does not specify the return structure (no output schema) or what 'performance stats' includes, which may be necessary for an agent to interpret the result. Without annotations, it does not fully disclose behavior.

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 has 100% coverage with descriptions for both parameters (count and offset), so the description adds little beyond them. The mention of 'performance stats' does not directly clarify the pagination parameters. Per the baseline for high schema coverage, score 3.

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 the specific verb 'List' with the resource 'campaign reports' and adds 'with performance stats' to clarify the content. This distinguishes it from sibling tools like list_campaigns (lists campaigns, not reports) and get_campaign_report (singular report).

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 no guidance on when to use this tool over siblings. There is no mention of alternatives or exclusions, such as using get_campaign_report for a single report. The agent is left to infer usage from the name alone.

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