bitdefender_list_reports

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the behavioral disclosure burden. It does this well by specifying the paginated envelope (page/pagesCount/perPage/total/items) and noting the returned fields including run occurrence. The read-only nature is implied by 'List', though not explicitly stated.

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 compact sentences with no filler: the resource and key output fields come first, then the critical downstream dependency, then the pagination envelope. Every sentence earns its place and the structure makes the tool easy to scan.

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 list endpoint with no output schema, the description is complete: it states what is listed, what fields are returned, that pagination is used, and how the results connect to another tool. Parameter details are already fully covered by the schema.

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?

All four parameters are fully described in the schema (100% coverage), so the description does not need to add parameter-level details. It does not add extra meaning beyond the schema for name, page, type, or perPage, so the baseline score of 3 is appropriate.

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 names a specific verb, resource, and scope: listing scheduled/instant reports configured on the account. It also distinguishes this tool from sibling list tools by focusing on reports and explicitly connecting the response IDs to bitdefender_get_report_download_links.

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 gives clear context for when this tool is useful: it is the source of report IDs needed by bitdefender_get_report_download_links. It does not explicitly state exclusions or alternatives, but the downstream linkage is strong enough to guide correct usage.

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