Listing reports

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and destructiveHint=false, so the safety profile is clear. The description adds that reports are enterprise-wide, providing scope context. However, it does not disclose pagination behavior or rate limits, which are not covered by annotations.

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 concise, with only two sentences. It front-loads the key action ('Listing reports') and adds scope context. No superfluous words.

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 list tool with no output schema, the description should ideally mention return format or pagination. The enterprise-wide scope is helpful, but the description lacks detail on what the list contains (e.g., report IDs, names) or any limitations.

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%, and each parameter's schema includes detailed descriptions. The tool description does not add any information beyond the schema, so baseline 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 tool lists existing reports, specifying 'Gets a list of existing reports.' This distinguishes it from sibling tools like action1_get_report_or_category (single report) and action1_create_report (creation). The enterprise-wide scope clarifies the resource context.

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 implies usage for listing reports but does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives like action1_get_report_or_category for a specific report or action1_list_report_data for data within a report. No exclusions or prerequisites are mentioned.

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