list_custom_reports

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It says 'List' which implies a read-only operation, but it does not disclose details like whether this returns a flat list, supports pagination (though limit/offset are in the schema), or includes archived configurations. The description adds minimal behavioral context beyond the name itself.

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 a single, concise sentence that is front-loaded with the action and resource. No unnecessary words or repetition. It earns its place with zero waste.

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 two optional parameters fully documented in the schema, the description is nearly complete. It does not explain return values, but no output schema exists, and the purpose is clear. The only gap is not clarifying the scope (e.g., non-VAST) given the presence of list_vast_custom_reports as a sibling, but this is a minor omission for a simple listing tool.

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% for both parameters (limit and offset). The description adds no additional parameter meaning, so the baseline of 3 applies. The schema already documents the parameters adequately.

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 the action (list) and the resource (saved report configurations). It distinguishes itself from related sibling tools like get_custom_report (single fetch) and list_vast_custom_reports (VAST-specific) by focusing on all saved configurations. The verb is specific and the scope is explicit.

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 implies usage: when you need to list saved report configurations, this is the tool. However, it does not explicitly mention alternatives or when not to use it (e.g., for VAST-specific reports, use list_vast_custom_reports). No exclusions or context are provided, leaving the agent to infer from sibling names.

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