Get Report Metadata

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. It discloses the behavior of returning available filters and columns and its role as a prerequisite for run_report. While it doesn't explicitly state read-only, 'get metadata' clearly implies a safe read operation. This is sufficient for a simple metadata tool.

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 long, front-loaded with the core purpose, and the second sentence adds practical usage guidance. Every word earns its place with no redundancy.

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's simplicity (one parameter, no output schema, no annotations), the description is complete enough. It states what is returned (filters and columns) and when to use it. A slight gap is the lack of an explicit return structure description, but this is minor for a metadata getter.

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?

The schema already provides 100% coverage with a clear description ('Report Id, e.g. from list_reports'). The tool description adds no additional parameter-specific meaning, so the baseline of 3 for high schema coverage is appropriate.

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 a specific verb+resource: 'Get a report's available filters and columns.' This distinguishes it from siblings like run_report (which executes) and list_reports (which lists reports). The purpose is unambiguous.

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 explicitly says to call this before run_report to learn parameter names, providing clear when-to-use guidance. However, it does not mention when not to use it or name alternatives, so it misses the full 'when/when-not/alternatives' criterion for a 5.

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