get_dv360_report

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, destructiveHint=false and openWorldHint, so the safety profile needs no restating. The description adds real value by stating what comes back (status, metadata, URL when available), but it says nothing about authentication/account scoping or the case where a report is still generating and has no URL — the exact edge an agent will hit.

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?

A single front-loaded sentence with no filler — verb, resource, and return payload in that order. Nothing here could be cut without losing information.

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?

An output schema exists, so return values need not be detailed, and the description covers them at a high level. But with zero schema coverage on three parameters, including a nullable account selector, the definition leaves an agent guessing about inputs — adequate but with a clear gap.

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%, so the description carries the full burden for three parameters and delivers none of it: query_id, report_id, and the nullable 'account' parameter are never explained. It only loosely implies that report_id identifies an existing report, leaving the account/credential-selection semantics completely undocumented.

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?

States a specific verb (get) and a specific resource (an existing DV360 report), plus what is returned: status, metadata, and the URL when available. That clearly separates it from list_dv360_reports and list_dv360_report_queries, though it never names those siblings explicitly.

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 word 'existing' hints that the report must already exist, but the description gives no when-to-use guidance, no exclusions, and no pointer to the listing tools that produce the query_id/report_id it requires. An agent must infer the retrieval workflow entirely.

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