loop.generate_report

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

Annotations are not provided, so the description must disclose behavior. The prefix '[workspace write][risk:write]' hints at side effects, but the description doesn't explain whether the report is written to disk, what the risk entails, or if it requires specific permissions. It also doesn't clarify if it modifies the loop state.

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 short and to the point, but it lacks necessary detail. The purpose is stated upfront, but the absence of parameter and usage information makes it under-specified rather than concise.

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 the tool has 3 parameters with zero schema coverage and no output schema, the description is inadequate. It does not explain how to construct a report, what the parameters mean, or what the output looks like, making it difficult for an agent to call correctly.

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 0%, and the description does not mention any parameters. All three parameters (title, summary, finalStatus) are undocumented in both schema and description, leaving the agent without any guidance on their syntax or purpose.

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 states a specific verb ('Generate') and resource ('Markdown report from recorded iterations'). However, it lacks detail on what the report contains and how it relates to sibling tools like 'flow.record_test_run' or 'ci.write_github_step_summary', making differentiation unclear.

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 gives no explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. While it mentions 'recorded iterations', it doesn't specify prerequisites (e.g., must call loop.record_iteration first) or any alternatives for reporting.

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