Workbooks List Report Page Elements

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and destructiveHint=false, and the description adds genuinely useful behavior: it auto-follows Sigma pagination to the last page and merges 'entries' from every page with nextPageToken null. That aggregation semantics is exactly the kind of context annotations cannot convey.

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?

Three short sentences, front-loaded with purpose and prerequisite. The inline backtick markup around ``entries`` and ``nextPageToken`` is slightly noisy but conveys concrete key names.

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 two-parameter read-only listing tool with an output schema, this covers purpose, prerequisite, and pagination/return-shape semantics. The only gap is that report_id is never explained.

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?

With 0% schema description coverage, the description must compensate for both parameters. It gives a concrete hint for page_id (retrieve via workbooks_list_report_pages) but says nothing about report_id or its relationship to page_id, leaving half the parameters undocumented.

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 ('List the elements on one page of a report') and scopes it to a single page, which distinguishes it from workbooks_list_report_elements and elements_list_workbook_page_elements. An agent can tell what it returns without opening the schema.

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?

Explicitly directs the agent to workbooks_list_report_pages to obtain the required page_id, which is a clear prerequisite. It doesn't explicitly contrast with the sibling that lists elements across all pages, so the boundary is implied rather than spelled out.

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