Autoload: report by ID

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

Annotations already declare read-only, non-destructive, idempotent. Description adds context about v3 supporting multiple feeds (feeds_urls array) vs v2's single feed_url, and confirms read-only nature. No contradictions, and adds valuable version differentiation.

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 concise sentences: first states purpose and output, second gives usage alternatives, third explains version difference. No redundancy, front-loaded with key info.

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, description sufficiently explains return fields and version-specific behavior. Annotations cover safety. For a single-parameter read tool, this is 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 description coverage is 100%, already explaining report_id and how to obtain it. Description repeats that info but does not add new semantic meaning beyond the schema, earning baseline 3.

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?

Clearly states it returns summary statistics of a specific upload by report_id, listing specific fields (section_stats, listing_fees, events, status, feeds_urls) and distinguishes from sibling tools (autoload_get_reports_v2 for getting report IDs and autoload_get_report_items_by_id for line-by-line breakdown).

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 tells when to use: get report_id from autoload_get_reports_v2; for line-by-line use autoload_get_report_items_by_id; also recommends v3 over v2.

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