Render a report as HTML (not JSON)

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and openWorldHint=true, so safety is covered. The description adds only the raw endpoint path (GET /v1/reports/{id}/html) and says nothing about what the returned HTML contains, whether the report must exist first, or any size/expiry constraints.

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?

A single short sentence that is front-loaded with the action and resource. The parenthetical '(not JSON)' is slightly repetitive with the title but carries real disambiguation value.

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 one required parameter, no output schema, and a read-only annotation, the minimal needs are covered. However, the description gives no hint about where a valid report id comes from or what the HTML response represents, which are the two things an agent would still need.

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 0% for the single required parameter, and the description only gestures at its meaning by embedding '{id}' in the URL template. It never states that id is a report identifier from reports_list or reports_generate, nor its expected format.

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 names a specific verb and resource ('Render a report as HTML') and the parenthetical '(not JSON)' distinguishes it from the JSON report fetch path. It does not explicitly point at siblings like reports_renderPdf or publicReports_html, so differentiation is partial.

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 '(not JSON)' qualifier implies the choice condition: use this when you want HTML output rather than structured JSON. There is no explicit when-not guidance, no mention of PDF rendering as an alternative, and no prerequisites stated.

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