Retrieves a report that summarizes the status, results, and any errors from an import process.
Importation Get Report
This tool declares no required parameters. Add optional parameters from the input schema as needed.
{
"id": 1,
"jsonrpc": "2.0",
"method": "tools/call",
"params": {
"arguments": {},
"name": "Importation_GetReport"
}
}| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
No arguments | |||
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v1.0.0Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
No annotations exist, and the description fails to disclose any behavioral traits. It does not state whether the tool is read-only, destructive, or requires special permissions, leaving the agent completely in the dark.
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 extremely short but lacks substance. It is under-specified, not truly concise in a helpful way. Every sentence should earn its place, and this one does not.
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 the lack of output schema and the complexity implied by numerous sibling tools, the description should explain what the report contains or how it differs. It provides no such context, making it incomplete.
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 tool has zero parameters, and the schema description coverage is 100%. The description adds no parameter-specific meaning, but since no explanation is needed, a baseline score of 3 is appropriate.
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 'Importation Get Report' merely restates the tool name without specifying what kind of report is retrieved, what data it contains, or how it differs from sibling tools like Importation_GetImportationMonitoring or Importation_GetProductsReport. This is a tautology.
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?
No usage context is provided. The description does not indicate when to use this tool over alternatives, nor does it mention any prerequisites or side effects.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.