generate_report

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

Beyond annotations, the description discloses that the report opens in browser by default and that parentheses in DGMO labels are stripped and used as color notation. This adds behavioral context not present in 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 highly concise: two sentences plus a crucial warning. It front-loads the main purpose and then provides specific usage guidance without extraneous words.

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?

While it covers the main purpose and key constraints, it lacks details on output location, failure modes, and does not explain what DGMO is. Given the tool has 7 parameters and nested sections, more context would be beneficial.

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%, so the description adds marginal value. It repeats the DGMO label constraints already in the schema and provides an example, but does not introduce new parameter semantics beyond confirming the 'open' default.

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 tool generates a polished HTML report with multiple DGMO diagrams, table of contents, and optional source blocks. It differentiates from sibling tools like render_diagram and preview_diagram by specifying it produces a multi-diagram report.

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 provides important formatting rules for DGMO labels (parentheses as color notation, uniqueness, dashes for qualifiers) but does not explicitly guide when to use this tool versus alternatives like render_diagram or preview_diagram.

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