list_available_reports

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It only says 'list,' which implies a read operation, but it does not mention permissions, what 'available' means, whether the search is recursive, or any side effects. The description adds no behavioral context beyond the core verb.

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, concise sentence that directly states the purpose without unnecessary words. It is front-loaded with the action and clearly conveys the tool's function.

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?

For a simple list tool, the description is adequate in stating the core function, but it lacks usage guidelines, exclusions, and any detail about the output structure (although an output schema exists). Given the ambiguity with siblings and lack of annotations, the description is not fully complete, but it is not severely deficient for such a simple operation.

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 input schema has one parameter 'directory' with no description (0% schema coverage). The description partially compensates by explaining that reports are listed in a specified directory, but it does not clarify the expected format or any constraints on the directory path. This is minimal but non-trivial compensation.

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) and the resource (available reports) with a scope (specified directory). It is distinct from sibling tool list_available_templates, which focuses on templates, so the purpose is unambiguous.

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?

There is no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like list_available_templates or upload_and_generate_prompt. The description provides no exclusions, prerequisites, or context that would help an agent choose this tool over others.

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