Retrieve recent end-of-day report summaries for your organization, newest first, to review team progress; optionally limit to 1–50 reports.
List recent end-of-day report summaries for the organization, most recent first. Requires the reports:read scope.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| limit | No | Max reports to return (1-50, default 14). |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v0.2.1Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
With no annotations at all, the description must carry the behavioral burden. It does disclose two useful traits — the required reports:read auth scope and that results come back most recent first as summaries rather than full reports — but says nothing about read-only safety, failure modes, or the default window it draws from.
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 short sentences with zero filler; the resource/scope statement is front-loaded and the auth requirement trails it as a prerequisite.
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 single-parameter list tool with no output schema, the definition covers resource, scope, ordering, and auth. It omits only secondary details such as what fields a summary contains and pagination behavior, which are minor gaps.
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 description coverage is 100% for the single limit parameter (1-50, default 14), so the schema fully documents it. The description adds no format, ordering, or interaction detail beyond what the schema already supplies, which is the baseline case.
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?
Clear verb+resource: lists end-of-day report summaries scoped to the organization, ordered most-recent-first. It describes the scope precisely but never names how it differs from the sibling get_report, which an agent must infer.
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?
"List recent" and the reports:read scope prerequisite imply when the tool is usable, but there is no explicit when-to-use versus get_report, and no statement about what happens when no reports exist.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.