generate_summary_report

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden. It mentions output format (JSON with Markdown) but fails to disclose any behavioral traits such as side effects, permissions, or constraints on inputs. This is insufficient for an unannotated tool.

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 structured with a title, Args, and Returns sections, making it easy to scan. It is relatively concise and front-loaded with the purpose, though some formatting (bold, code blocks) adds minor overhead.

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 covers the core functionality, parameters, and output format. However, it lacks details on default behavior when date_range is null, and it does not indicate if report_type is strictly limited to 'daily' and 'weekly'. The existence of an output schema reduces the need to explain return values, but behavioral completeness is still lacking.

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 0% description coverage, so the description must compensate. It explains both parameters: report_type as 'daily/weekly' and date_range as an object with format and example, plus a note about not passing integers. This adds significant meaning beyond the schema, though an explicit enum for report_type would improve it.

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 is a daily/weekly summary generator that automatically generates hot spot summary reports. The verb 'generate' and resource 'summary report' are specific, and the tool is distinct from sibling analysis tools, though no explicit distinction is made.

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?

The description does not provide any guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It only states its function, leaving agents without context on prioritization or exclusion.

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