list_reports

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

With no annotations, the description must disclose behavioral traits, but it only says 'List Arc reports with optional filtering and pagination.' It does not state the response format, default page size, maximum results, or whether all reports are returned when no filter is applied.

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 with no repetition or unnecessary details. Every word adds value.

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?

The description sufficiently identifies the action and resource for a simple list tool, but the lack of an output schema and annotations leaves gaps about return values and default behavior. The optional parameters are well documented in the schema, so the description is minimally adequate rather than complete.

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 coverage is 100% and each parameter has a clear inline description. The tool description adds no parameter-specific detail beyond the words 'filtering' and 'pagination,' which are already reflected in the schema fields, so the baseline score of 3 applies.

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 uses a specific verb ('List') and resource ('Arc reports'), clearly indicating a read-only enumeration of reports. It also mentions filtering and pagination, which distinguishes this from sibling get_report, create_report, update_report, and delete_report tools.

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 explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as get_report for single-report retrieval. The mention of filtering and pagination implies a browsing use case, but no exclusions or alternatives are stated.

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