Reports: get sums report

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, and destructiveHint. The description adds value beyond annotations by disclosing the asynchronous generation behavior and that creating a new report of the same type replaces the previous one. This gives useful expectations about data availability and freshness.

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 compact and front-loaded: the READ-ONLY emoji and safety note appear first, followed by a one-line purpose, then two essential behavioral caveats, and the endpoint. Every sentence earns its place with no filler.

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 fetch tool with full schema coverage and clear annotations, the description covers the key non-obvious aspects: async generation, report replacement, and endpoint. It does not describe the response format, but no output schema exists and the purpose is straightforward, so this is acceptable.

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%, so all parameters are already documented in the schema. The tool description itself does not add further parameter semantics, so the baseline score of 3 applies.

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 'Returns a previously created sums report' with a specific resource type. However, it does not explicitly distinguish itself from the sibling reports_get_sums_ledger, which could be confused as another sums report variant.

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 clear context: the report must already exist, is only available after async generation finishes, and can be replaced by creating a new report. It does not explicitly mention when to prefer this tool over alternatives like reports_get_sums_ledger, but the usage context is strong enough for an agent to infer the right situation.

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