list_reports

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and openWorldHint=true, so the read-only nature is covered. The description adds a version note but discloses no extra behavioral traits like pagination behavior, included fields, or rate limits. With annotations present, this is acceptable but not enriched.

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?

One short sentence that is front-loaded with the primary action. The parenthetical endpoint note is extra but minimal. Every word earns its place, with no fluff.

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-only list tool with 100% schema coverage and readOnlyHint, the description is largely sufficient. However, it does not explicitly mention what fields are returned (e.g., report ID, name, category), and without an output schema this could be slightly incomplete. Still, the core behavior is clear.

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 schema already provides 100% coverage with descriptions for limit, search, and category. The description does not add any param-specific meaning beyond what the schema offers, hitting the baseline of 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 clearly states 'List saved reports in the instance' with a specific verb and resource, distinguishing it from siblings like get_report (single report) and create_report. The added endpoint reference reinforces the resource scope.

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?

No guidance on when to use this tool vs alternatives such as get_report for detailed report info or export_report_data. The description is purely functional and lacks any when-to-use or exclusions.

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