list_reports

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must carry the full burden of behavioral disclosure. 'List' implies a read-only operation, but the description does not explicitly confirm safety, mention auth requirements, describe what is returned, or note any side effects. It adds minimal behavioral context beyond the tool's name.

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 a single, clear sentence that front-loads the main action and resource. It uses no unnecessary words and directly conveys the essential function and the optional parameter, earning its place with zero waste.

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 and the presence of an output schema, the description provides an adequate baseline. However, it lacks context about filtering behavior, pagination, or permission implications, which could be important for an agent deciding whether to call this tool among several list-based siblings. The description is minimally sufficient but not fully informative.

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 description partially compensates for the 0% schema coverage by explaining that workspace_id is optional and represents a workspace (group) ID. However, it does not explain the format, constraints, or what happens when null. The schema names the parameter, so description adds understanding of its semantic role, but gaps remain.

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 action 'List reports' with a specific resource, distinguishing it from sibling tools like list_workspaces, list_datasets, and list_dashboards. The optional scoping to a workspace (group) ID adds specific context that further clarifies the tool's function.

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 provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. Although sibling list tools exist, there is no comparison, no mention of preferred use cases, and no exclusions. The optional workspace scoping is mentioned but not framed as a decision criterion.

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