get_universe_related_reports

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. It implies a read-only discovery operation through 'Queries' and 'discover', and lists returned fields, but it does not explicitly state read-only safety, absence of side effects, required permissions, or rate limits.

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 tight sentences with the core purpose front-loaded and no wasted wording. Every sentence contributes directly to understanding the tool's scope and output.

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 one-parameter read tool with an output schema, the description covers purpose and return fields adequately. However, it omits usage guidance versus numerous sibling tools and provides no parameter semantics for universe_id, leaving gaps an agent must infer.

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 universe_id. The description only mentions 'a specific universe', adding minimal meaning about what universe_id represents, its format, or where to obtain it.

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 uses a specific verb ('Queries the CMS to discover') and a precise resource ('all Web Intelligence reports built on top of a specific universe'). It clearly differentiates from generic siblings like get_reports or get_webi_docs by tying the query to a universe, though it does not explicitly name alternatives.

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 when-to-use guidance or alternatives are provided. It states what the tool does but does not tell the agent when to prefer it over get_reports, get_webi_docs, or get_universe_details, nor any prerequisites such as needing a valid universe ID from get_universes.

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