Check Reports Access

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

With no annotations, the description carries the behavioral disclosure burden. It explains the required environment variable, the required Play Console permission, and that the tool returns a diagnosis with the exact remedy when something is missing. This reveals the tool is a non-mutating preflight check, which is strong behavioral context for an unannotated tool.

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 front-loaded with the core purpose and a direct instruction ('Run this first'), then provides exactly the necessary setup context and return behavior. Every sentence earns its place, and the structure is 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 zero-parameter diagnostic tool, the description fully covers what is verified, why it is needed, the exact configuration requirements, and what the tool returns. The presence of an output schema also relieves the description from detailing the return structure. Nothing essential is missing.

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 tool has zero parameters and the schema coverage is 100%, so there is no parameter detail the description needs to add. The baseline for zero-parameter tools is 4, and the description appropriately focuses on what the check validates rather than inputs.

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 action ('Verify the Play reports bucket is configured and readable') on a clear resource, and positions it as a prerequisite check. It is clearly distinct from the sibling report-fetching tools like get_installs_report because it targets configuration and access rather than data retrieval.

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?

It explicitly instructs 'Run this first', giving a clear when-to-use directive before report-related tools. It explains why it must run first: the reports come from a private bucket that needs separate setup. However, it does not name the specific sibling report tools or state explicit when-not-to-use conditions, leaving some routing to inference.

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