get_all_reports

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 discloses the 'single call' behavior, which is useful, but does not state return format, pagination, or explicitly confirm read-only safety. The verb 'get' implies a read operation, but the absence of explicit behavioral detail is a gap.

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 a single 12-word sentence, front-loaded with the verb and resource. Every word earns its place, with no redundancy or filler.

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?

Given the tool's moderate complexity (4 parameters, 3 report types) and no output schema, the description provides a high-level purpose but lacks details on response structure or behavior around defaults/limits. An agent may not know exactly what each report type returns.

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%, so the baseline is 3. The description's mention of report types (year, r12, quarter) provides context for the maxR12QCount and maxYearCount parameters, but it adds no new syntax or details beyond the schema's existing parameter descriptions.

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 action (Get), the resource (all report types), the specific types (year, r12, quarter), and the scope (for one instrument). This distinguishes it from sibling tools like get_reports (which likely fetches a single report type) and get_reports_batch (multiple instruments).

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 phrase 'in a single call' implies an advantage over calling get_reports multiple times, and the scope 'for one instrument' clarifies the intended context. However, it does not explicitly mention alternatives or exclusion scenarios, so it falls short of a 5.

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