finance_reports__list

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

Annotations already declare the tool as readOnly and idempotent. The description adds the output format (gzipped TSV) and auth details but does not disclose pagination behavior or rate limits, which would add value 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?

The description is two sentences, front-loaded with the action and output format. No waste; every word adds value.

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 5 parameters and no output schema, the description covers core purpose and format but omits mention of pagination (next_url parameter) and response structure. It is adequate but not fully 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%, so the schema already documents all parameters. The description adds no additional meaning to parameters beyond what's in the schema, fitting the baseline of 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?

The description clearly states the tool downloads a finance report as gzipped TSV and includes the endpoint and required credentials. This verb+resource combination distinguishes it from siblings like sales_reports__list which deals with sales reports.

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 specifies prerequisites (ASC_VENDOR_NUMBER and Finance role) but does not explicitly guide when to use this tool versus alternatives like sales_reports__list. Usage context is implied but no exclusions or alternative references are provided.

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