List Recent Report Exports

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

Goes well beyond the annotations by disclosing retention semantics (24h or the report's retain_days), the consequence of expiry (`expired: true` with a dead URL), that the list is scoped to the calling key, and that the call is free. One weak spot: 'Free to call' conflicts with the attached cost metadata ('see your plan — endpoint not in the public credit manifest'), and the annotations' readOnlyHint=false sits awkwardly with a pure GET listing, though the description never explicitly claims read-only status.

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?

Front-loads what is returned, then moves to usage, then to expiry behavior, then pagination. Every sentence carries information, though the lead sentence's field enumeration partly duplicates the output schema and the closing cost note is one clause too many.

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 zero-argument listing tool with an output schema, this covers what an agent needs: scope, retention, expiry signaling, pagination cap and cost posture. The only incompleteness is the unresolved cost contradiction between 'Free to call' and the endpoint's plan-based pricing note.

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?

The input schema declares zero properties, so the description must supply the parameter story and does: it documents `?limit=` with range 1–50 and default 10. It is slightly loose in presenting it as a query string rather than a schema property, which could confuse an agent about how to pass it, but the meaning is unambiguous.

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 and resource plus scope: 'List the calling key's most recently generated PDF reports', and enumerates the returned fields (type, byte size, page count, language, timestamps, url). It is immediately distinguishable from the sibling generation tools such as astroway_reports_generate or astroway_reports_natal, which produce reports rather than enumerate past ones.

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?

Gives two concrete usage contexts: re-fetching a link while it lives, or surfacing recent exports in a dashboard, and warns that PDFs are purged after 24h so older entries are useless. It stops short of naming an explicit alternative tool or an exclusion case, but the intended situations are clear.

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