list_saved_reports

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

Annotations already convey read-only and non-destructive nature. The description adds the overwrite warning and details the returned fields (report_id, path, line count, UTC timestamp, content hash prefix), enriching behavioral context beyond annotations.

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?

Two punchy sentences plus a return specification. Purpose is front-loaded, every sentence earns its place, and there is no fluff.

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 parameterless, read-only tool with an output schema, the description covers purpose, return contents, and usage timing. Nothing an agent needs to invoke it correctly is missing.

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?

Tool has zero parameters; baseline is 4. No parameter explanation needed, and schema coverage is irrelevant with 0 params.

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 it lists saved summary reports ('이미 저장된 요약 보고서 목록을 조회합니다') and explains its role in checking before saving. This distinguishes it from write operations like save_approved_report.

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 explicitly says when to use: before saving, to avoid overwriting (같은 report_id로 저장하면 덮어쓰기가 되므로, 저장 전에 확인). It does not name alternatives, but the context is clear among siblings.

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