create_stakeholder_report

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

No annotations exist, and the description fails to disclose any behavioral traits such as output format, side effects, authorization needs, or error conditions. The agent gains no insight into what happens during report creation.

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 concise sentence with no fluff. However, it sacrifices substance for brevity—it is too short to be useful.

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?

Given no output schema, no annotations, and 3 undocumented parameters, the description is severely incomplete. The agent lacks critical information about report structure, output format, and how to effectively use parameters like focus_areas or time_period.

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 input schema has 3 parameters (audience, focus_areas, time_period) with 0% description coverage. The description adds no information about any parameter, leaving the agent to guess their meaning and constraints beyond the schema's enum and defaults.

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 'Tailored reports for product/exec/sales/engineering' clearly indicates the tool creates stakeholder-specific reports. The verb is implied, and the resource (stakeholder reports) is evident. However, it does not explicitly differentiate from sibling tools like create_customer_briefing or generate_research_brief, though the audience enum provides some distinction.

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 provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives. There is no mention of prerequisites, context, or scenarios where this tool is preferred over sibling report-generation tools.

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