data-report-detail

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden but offers minimal behavioral insight. It doesn't disclose if this is a read-only operation, requires authentication, has rate limits, or what the output format might be (e.g., JSON structure, error handling). The description is too sparse to inform agent behavior beyond the basic action.

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 extremely concise with a single sentence, but this brevity borders on under-specification rather than efficiency. It's front-loaded with the core action, yet lacks necessary details, making it somewhat ineffective despite its compact form.

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 complexity (a fetch operation with one parameter), no annotations, no output schema, and 0% schema coverage, the description is incomplete. It doesn't cover what 'detail' includes, error cases, or usage context, leaving significant gaps for an AI agent to operate effectively.

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 adds no meaning beyond the input schema, which has 0% description coverage. With one required parameter ('dataReportId'), the description doesn't explain what this ID is, how to obtain it (e.g., from 'data-report-list'), or its format (e.g., numeric ID as indicated by schema). This fails to compensate for the schema's lack of documentation.

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 'fetch data report detail' states a verb ('fetch') and resource ('data report detail'), but is vague about what 'detail' entails compared to siblings like 'data-report-list'. It doesn't specify if this returns metadata, content, or analytics, leaving the purpose ambiguous despite naming the target resource.

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?

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives. With siblings like 'data-report-list' and various analytics tools, the description lacks context on prerequisites (e.g., needing a report ID from 'data-report-list') or distinctions (e.g., this fetches a single report vs. listing multiple).

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