report_manager.get_reports

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

Beyond the read-only annotation, the description discloses pagination behavior ('sends paginated requests... collects every page'), server-side filtering, and the failure return shape ({'error': ...}). This tells the agent not to expect partial pages and how failures surface.

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 short and front-loaded: purpose first, then pagination/behavior, then return shape. No sentence is wasted; the endpoint URL and return line add practical detail without bloat.

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 no output schema, the description fully specifies the return type ('list[dict[str, Any]] | dict[str, Any]') and the error shape. Combined with the read-only annotation and comprehensive schema, nothing essential is missing for an agent to call this tool correctly.

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 coverage is 100%, with every parameter documented in the input schema. The description adds only a general statement that filters are applied server-side, which is a behavioral note rather than parameter-level semantics, so baseline 3 applies.

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 opens with a concrete verb and resource ('Retrieve all reports configured in Report Manager') and adds behavioral specificity (paginated requests, flat list). It clearly distinguishes this tool from the dashboard/datamodel/folder/plugin getters among the siblings by naming the Report Manager 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?

It provides clear context for when to call it: any time all reports (optionally filtered) are needed, with filters applied server-side. It does not explicitly name alternative tools or list exclusions, but no overlapping report-management siblings exist, so the context is sufficient for an agent to select it.

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