Workbooks List Report Lineage

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, destructiveHint=false, and openWorldHint=true, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds no behavioral context of its own – nothing about what lineage means, its depth, or how it is scoped – so it contributes essentially nothing beyond the 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?

A single short sentence with no wasted words, but it is terse to the point of under-specification rather than genuinely economical. Front-loading is fine; the issue is minimal content.

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?

Complexity is low (one required param) and an output schema exists, so return values need not be explained. Still, the description gives no context on what a report's lineage contains, leaving the agent able to call it but not fully informed about the result.

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?

There is one parameter, report_id, and schema description coverage is 0%, so the schema documents nothing. The description also says nothing about what report_id refers to or where to obtain it, so it fails to compensate for the coverage gap.

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 (List) and resource (lineage for a report), so the agent knows exactly what it retrieves. It does not, however, distinguish itself from the closely named sibling workbooks_list_workbook_lineage or datasets_list_data_model_lineage, leaving the report/workbook boundary to be inferred from the name alone.

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 offers no when-to-use guidance, no prerequisites, and no mention of the alternative lineage tools. Usage is only loosely implied by the phrase 'for a report'.

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