get_report

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

With no annotations, the description carries the behavioral disclosure burden; it does communicate that the tool returns a report's configuration rather than just existence. It does not explicitly state read-only behavior, permissions, or behavior when the report is missing, leaving some ambiguity for a tool with no annotation safety hints.

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?

Single sentence with no filler; the key verb and object lead, and the additional content list is compact and informative.

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 read tool with no output schema, the description covers what the agent receives (SPL, schedule, ACL, config). It lacks explicit usage differentiation from list_reports, but the schema fleshes out the parameters and the rest is straightforward.

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 parameter descriptions already explain app, name, and owner. The tool description adds no parameter-level meaning beyond labeling the target as a saved search, so the baseline of 3 applies.

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 states a specific verb (Get) and resource (one report), disambiguates 'report' as a saved search, and enumerates the returned config (SPL, schedule, ACL, full config). This clearly distinguishes it from siblings like list_reports and create_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 phrase 'one report' implies use with list_reports for enumeration, but there is no explicit when-to-use guidance or mention of alternatives. An agent must infer that this is the detail-fetch variant based on sibling names.

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