Updating a custom report

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

Annotations already indicate destructiveHint=true. The description adds a behavioral constraint (category immutability) and permission info. However, it does not describe side effects, reversibility, or the destructive nature beyond what annotations provide.

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 short but contains redundancy ('Updating a custom report. Updates a custom report.'). It conveys essential info but could be more concise.

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 complexity (nested body, dry_run/confirm, multiple siblings), the description lacks important context like how to properly execute an update (dry_run and confirm flow). Output schema exists but does not compensate for missing operational details.

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%, so baseline is 3. The description does not add extra meaning for parameters like the body object or the dry_run/confirm mechanism, which are critical for correct usage.

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 updates a custom report, with a specific verb and resource. It adds a constraint (cannot change category) and required permission. However, it redundantly repeats the purpose and does not differentiate from siblings like create or delete reports.

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 provides a constraint (cannot change category) and permission requirement, but no explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives (e.g., create_report, delete_report). No mention of prerequisites or exclusions.

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