apple_list_analytics_reports

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full behavioral burden. “List” implies a read operation, but the description does not disclose pagination, auth requirements, return shape, or any other behavioral detail beyond the basic action.

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 front-loaded sentence with useful examples and no wasted wording. It is concise, though its brevity contributes to the missing usage and parameter detail.

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 tool with three parameters, zero schema descriptions, no annotations, and no output schema, the description is too thin. It does not explain optional filters, return values, or how this tool fits with the related analytics report tools.

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 0%, and the description only indirectly signals that requestId is the analytics report request identifier. It does not explain the optional name parameter or the category enum values, which the schema leaves undocumented.

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?

States a specific verb and resource: “List the reports available for an analytics report request,” with examples of report names. It is clear enough to distinguish from listing report requests themselves, though it does not explicitly name sibling alternatives.

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 phrase “for an analytics report request” implies that a request ID is needed, but the description gives no explicit when-to-use guidance, prerequisites, or comparison with sibling tools such as list_analytics_report_instances or list_analytics_report_segments.

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