Autoload: report list

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

Annotations already indicate readOnlyHint=true, destructiveHint=false, idempotentHint=true. The description adds that the tool is read-only, sorted descending, and returns a meta block with total/pages, which are useful behavioral details beyond 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?

Two sentences: first covers core functionality, second provides usage workflow and sibling references. Front-loaded with key information, no filler.

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 4 parameters all documented in schema, annotations present, and no output schema, the description adequately explains return fields, sorting, meta block, and usage flow. Could mention pagination defaults but schema covers that.

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%, so baseline is 3. The description mentions pagination and date filter but does not add significant meaning beyond what the schema already provides (e.g., per_page cap, RFC3339 format are already in schema).

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 explicitly states it returns a list of autoload reports with specific fields, pagination, and date filters. It distinguishes from sibling tools by directing users to find a report_id and then use autoload_get_report_by_id_v3 or autoload_get_report_items_by_id.

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 clearly says to use this tool to find a report_id and then fetch details via siblings. It implies when to use it but does not explicitly mention when not to use it (e.g., 'do not use if you already have a report_id').

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