Request a report

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It transparently states that the operation creates a request and returns a reportId, implying a write operation. However, it does not disclose that report generation is asynchronous or that the report will not be immediately available, which is a behavioral detail an agent might need to know.

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?

The description is concise and well-structured. It states the action, the return value, and provides useful examples in just two sentences. No unnecessary words or redundancy.

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 simple creation tool with one parameter, the description provides enough context to understand its role in the overall report workflow (create, then get, then download). The sibling tool names reinforce this. It lacks an explicit mention of the report lifecycle, but that is not essential for calling this tool correctly.

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 schema description for reportType is minimal: 'SP-API report type.' The tool description provides example values, which helps, but the schema itself lacks detail about the expected format or available valid values. The description does not fully clarify what constitutes a valid reportType beyond the examples given.

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 clearly states the tool's function: 'Creates a report request and returns a reportId.' It also provides specific example report types, which makes the purpose concrete and distinguishable from sibling tools like get_report (retrieves a report) or download_report (downloads report content).

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?

Usage is implied through the verb 'Creates' and the context of sibling tools, but the description does not explicitly differentiate when to use this tool versus get_report or download_report. It lacks explicit guidance such as 'Use this to initiate a report; use get_report to check status or download_report to retrieve data.'

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