generate_report

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and openWorldHint=true, which the description does not contradict. The description adds useful context beyond annotations by specifying output characteristics (branded, includes charts/tables/ServiceNow links) and the two input modes (content vs. sections).

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 three sentences, front-loaded with the main verb and resource. Each sentence adds value: what it does, when to use it, and the two modes. No wasted words.

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?

Given the tool has 5 parameters but no output schema, the description adequately covers what the tool does, when to use it, and the two main input modes. It does not explain return values or error conditions, but that is not explicitly required and the description is otherwise complete for the described complexity.

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 parameters are fully documented. The description adds minimal extra meaning by summarizing the content/sections distinction, but it does not introduce new parameter-specific details beyond what the schema already provides. Baseline 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 clearly states a specific action ('Generate a branded PDF or PPTX report') on a specific resource ('capability analysis results'). It distinguishes itself from sibling tools by emphasizing management-ready output with charts, tables, and ServiceNow links, and by explaining the single vs. multi-capability modes.

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?

Provides explicit guidance on when to use: 'Call this after completing a scan, review, or audit'. This clearly defines the intended context. However, it does not explicitly mention when not to use it or alternatives, so it stops short of a 5.

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