List Client Reports

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

Annotations already declare idempotentHint=true, destructiveHint=false, and openWorldHint=false, so the safety profile is largely covered. The description usefully adds that results are newest-first and enumerates returned fields, but it does not explain the notable readOnlyHint=false (an unusual signal for a listing tool) nor error behavior for unknown clients.

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?

Two sentences, no filler, with the scoping and ordering constraint front-loaded before the return-field detail. Every clause carries information.

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?

With no output schema, the description compensates by describing the returned record shape (report_id, report_type, path, created_at), which is genuinely helpful. It omits potential pagination/limit behavior and handling of a client with no reports, leaving minor gaps for a low-complexity two-parameter 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%, and both parameters (db_path, client_id) are fully documented in the schema, including the path-resolution constraints. The description adds no parameter detail beyond the schema, 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?

States a specific verb (list), resource (report records), scope (for a client), and ordering (newest first), plus the fields each record returns. It is clearly distinct from the generate_report/generate_pdf_report siblings, though it never names those siblings to reinforce the distinction.

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?

There is no guidance on when to use this versus alternatives (e.g., generate_report_json or generate_pdf_report), and no mention of prerequisites such as the client needing to exist or having prior reports. The agent must infer usage from the name alone.

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