Suggested fix (from triage)

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

Annotations already mark this as read-only and idempotent, and the description reinforces this by saying 'Read-only' and explaining that it reads the existing classification. The added value beyond annotations is the precondition about triage_issue and the promise of being faster than get_report_detail.

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?

Clear, front-loaded, and scannable; the first sentence conveys the core purpose and alternatives. There is mild redundancy in listing the exact return fields, since the field list and output schema largely repeat the prose, but the structure is otherwise efficient.

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?

The description is complete for a simple, single-parameter read-only tool: it covers what is returned, how to use it, the precondition, and the alternatives. No crucial context appears 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?

With one required parameter at 100% schema description coverage, the schema already documents reportId as a 'Report UUID to read the Stage-2 suggested-fix slice for'. The description's mention of 'one report' echoes this but does not add substantial semantic detail beyond 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?

Description begins with a specific verb and resource: 'Return the Stage-2 suggested-fix slice for one report' and enumerates exactly which fields are included. It differentiates itself from get_report_detail and get_fix_context by naming what it is NOT and why you would choose it.

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?

Provides explicit guidance: use when you only need the human-readable hint, use get_report_detail when needing more detail, and use get_fix_context when you want the full paste-ready bundle. Also states the precondition that triage_issue should be run first if the report is unclassified.

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