Retrieve a report

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, and destructiveHint=false, so safety is covered. The description adds nothing beyond that, omitting what happens on an unknown id, whether the report must be finalized before retrieval, or any auth scoping.

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?

Very short and front-loaded, but the opening sentence is fully redundant with the second. The id-format detail could have been spent instead on disambiguating this tool from its closest sibling.

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 one-parameter read tool with full schema coverage and a complete annotation set, the description is minimally sufficient to invoke correctly. It is not sufficient to choose correctly among the several other report- and statement-reading siblings.

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 the single id parameter is already documented with its `rpt_…` format. The description repeats that format without adding constraints such as case sensitivity or cross-account validity, so it neither helps nor hurts.

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 (retrieve a report by id) but the second sentence merely restates the first with the id prefix added. It gives no differentiation from plausible siblings such as download_report, get_statement, or list_reports, so an agent cannot tell from the text alone which retrieval tool fits.

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?

There is no when-to-use guidance, no mention of prerequisites, and no named alternative. The description never explains why an agent would call get_report rather than download_report or list_reports, leaving selection entirely to inference from tool names.

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