Run Report (sync)

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

No annotations are present, so the description bears the full transparency burden. It states that execution is synchronous and that rows are returned, which is useful, but it does not disclose whether the operation is read-only, potential rate limits, timeouts, or pagination behavior. This is adequate but not comprehensive.

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 core action ('Run a report synchronously and return its rows') and then provides essential parameter guidance and date format. No redundant words or 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 the variable-parameter nature, lack of output schema, and sibling tools, the description could be more complete. It references get_report_metadata for params and date format, but does not mention run_report_export as an alternative for large results or describe output limitations/pagination. This is a noticeable gap for a synchronous report tool.

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 covers both parameters (reportId and params) at 100%, so the baseline is 3. The description adds meaningful context by noting that params vary by report, listing common parameters (StartDate, EndDate, ProgramId/SUBAID), specifying YYYY-MM-DD date format, and referring to get_report_metadata for discovery. This goes beyond what the schema alone provides.

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 uses a specific verb 'Run' with a resource 'report' and the qualifier 'synchronously' while clarifying it returns rows. This distinguishes it from sibling run_report_export, which likely handles asynchronous/batch exports, and from list_reports which lists reports rather than executing them.

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 points to get_report_metadata for discovering report parameters, giving a clear alternative/companion tool. It implies the sync use case for direct row retrieval but does not explicitly mention when to prefer run_report_export for larger datasets, so it lacks exclusion guidance.

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