get_report

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

With no annotations, the description must carry the behavioral burden. "Get" implies a read-only operation and the description usefully discloses that the payload includes both report details and SQL queries, but says nothing about permissions, error behavior, or whether archived reports are retrievable.

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 opening sentence is tight and front-loaded, but the Args block duplicates the schema verbatim and consumes roughly half the text without adding information.

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?

An output schema exists, so return shape need not be described, and the tool is a simple one-parameter getter. Still, nothing is said about token provenance, access requirements, or behavior on invalid/archived tokens, leaving real gaps for an agent.

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% for the single parameter, and the description merely restates the name ("report_token: The report token") with no format, source, or example. It adds no meaning beyond the schema's type declaration.

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: fetching a report's details plus its SQL queries. That scope is clear, but it never contrasts itself with siblings like search_reports or list_reports, so the agent must infer the distinction from name alone.

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 when-to-use guidance and no mention of alternatives such as search_reports for discovery or list_reports for enumeration. The only implied context is retrieving one report by token.

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