generate_report

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. It discloses the side effect of writing a file to the server's output directory and tracking on the engagement. However, it doesn't address idempotency, overwrite behavior, or authorization needs.

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?

Three concise sentences that front-load the purpose and format options. Every sentence adds necessary information without redundancy.

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?

The description covers purpose, content, and side effects. However, given the complexity and existence of sibling tools, it lacks clarity on return values, error conditions, and prerequisites (e.g., engagement must exist).

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?

Despite 0% schema coverage, the description adds value for the 'format' parameter by enumerating valid values ('json, markdown, or html') that are not in the schema. However, 'title' and 'engagement_id' are not elaborated upon.

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 identifies the tool's action ('Generate a report'), specifies the supported formats (json, markdown, html), and defines the domain ('for an engagement'). It distinguishes itself from siblings like 'export_report' by explaining it creates a file and tracks it on the engagement.

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 use when a new report is needed, but lacks explicit guidance on when to use this tool over siblings (e.g., 'export_report' vs. 'list_reports'). No prerequisites or exclusions are stated.

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