sigma_list_all_reports

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

Annotations already cover readOnlyHint=true and destructiveHint=false, but the description adds valuable behavioral context by stating that pagination is automatically followed. This is a non-obvious implementation detail that affects how the agent can use the results. It does not contradict annotations.

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, front-loaded sentence that conveys all essential information without redundancy. Every word ('List', 'ALL', 'reports', 'organization', 'automatically following pagination') contributes to understanding the tool's purpose and behavior.

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 zero-parameter list operation with an output schema and safety annotations, the description fully covers the tool's function and key behavior (automatic pagination). No further details are necessary, as return values are specified by the output schema.

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 has zero parameters, so the description has no parameter details to add. According to the rubric, a baseline of 4 applies when there are no parameters, which is appropriate here.

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 verb ('List'), resource ('all reports'), and scope ('in the organization'). It distinguishes itself from sibling tools like sigma_list_reports by emphasizing 'ALL' and 'automatically following pagination', indicating a comprehensive listing without manual page handling.

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 description implies that this tool is for retrieving the complete set of reports without needing to process pagination manually. It provides clear context for when to use it, but does not explicitly name alternatives or state when not to use it, 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.