uxpass_report_html

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

No annotations are present, so the description should disclose behavioral traits. It does not mention authentication requirements, rate limits, error handling, or what happens with invalid run_ids. The description is too sparse to provide transparency.

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 a single sentence that is perfectly concise with no unnecessary words. It front-loads the action and resource clearly.

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 simple reporting tool with one parameter and many sibling tools, the description is minimally complete. However, it lacks details about the output format, potential errors, or content of the HTML report.

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 coverage is 100%, with the parameter already described as 'The run id returned by uxpass_run'. The description adds no additional meaning beyond the schema, so 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 clearly states the action (Get), the resource (HTML report), and the context (for a UXPass run). It distinguishes from sibling tools by specifying 'HTML' as opposed to JSON or Markdown formats.

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 guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives like uxpass_report_json or uxpass_report_md. There is no mention of prerequisites or scenarios where this tool is preferred.

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