rm_get_report_totals

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and destructiveHint=false, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds only that results are aggregated totals, but does not disclose behavior such as how report_parameters is interpreted, whether the computation has limits, or why openWorldHint applies.

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 sentence is short and has no filler, but it is under-specified rather than efficiently complete. A single vague clause is not an appropriately sized description for a tool with an undocumented nested parameter.

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?

Despite an output schema and annotations, the essential input contract is missing. An agent cannot construct report_parameters or decide whether this tool fits the request, so the description is materially incomplete.

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 single required parameter report_parameters is an opaque object with additionalProperties:true and no schema descriptions. The description completely fails to compensate for 0% coverage, so an agent cannot know what keys, values, or shape to supply.

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 names a verb and resource ('Generate aggregated custom report totals'), making the general purpose understandable. However, 'custom report totals' is vague—it does not define what kind of report, what totals are computed, or how this relates to similar report tools like rm_get_report_rows.

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?

No guidance is given about when to use this tool versus alternatives. There is no mention of prerequisites, when to prefer rm_get_report_rows, or what types of reporting requests should be routed here.

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