infomaniak_list_drive_activity_reports

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

Annotations already declare read-only, idempotent, and open-world hints. The description adds the notion that reports are 'generated' and that filtering is possible, providing a small amount of extra context. However, it does not disclose pagination behavior, authentication needs, or other operational details beyond what annotations imply.

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, front-loaded sentence with no wasted words. It states the action, resource, and key optionality efficiently.

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?

With an output schema present and annotations covering safety, the description is minimally adequate. However, it does not explain the query object's structure beyond a vague reference to filters, nor does it mention that the list is paginated. The schema compensates, but a bit more guidance would improve completeness.

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 50%, so the description partially compensates by mentioning 'filtered by users and report status metadata.' However, it does not explain the nested query object, pagination (page, per_page), ordering (order, order_by), or other parameters. It adds some meaning but leaves much to the schema.

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 ('List') and resource ('generated kDrive activity reports') and distinguishes this tool from siblings like get_drive_activity_report (singular) and create/delete/export report tools. It clearly communicates that this is a listing operation with optional filtering.

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 implies usage by stating the tool lists reports and can filter by users and status metadata, but it does not explicitly mention when to use this vs alternatives (e.g., get_drive_activity_report for a single report). No exclusions or alternative guidance is provided.

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