Report Export

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full behavioral burden. It implies a side-effecting write (documents are produced) but says nothing about where files are written, whether existing exports are overwritten, whether an active report is required, or any auth/permission needs.

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, front-loaded sentence with the verb and resource first and no filler. The trailing phrase 'from the active session' is vague, but no words are wasted.

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?

An output schema exists, so return values need not be explained, and there is only one well-documented parameter. Still, for a side-effecting export tool with zero annotation coverage, the description should mention the output destination/overwrite behavior and the prerequisite session state.

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 the single 'fmt' parameter already documents its html|docx|both values. The description's plural 'document(s)' faintly hints that multiple formats can be produced, but adds no real meaning beyond the schema; baseline 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 ('Generate') and resource ('report document(s)'), so the agent knows this produces output artifacts rather than editing or reading report state. However, it offers no differentiation from siblings like report_start or report_open, which could plausibly also be described as 'generating' a report.

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?

'from the active session' implies a precondition (a session must already exist and hold report content), which is a weak usage signal. There is no explicit when-to-use vs. report_start/report_open/report_status guidance and no stated exclusions.

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