get_test_report

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must disclose behavioral traits. It mentions 'optionally clear' but does not disclose that the 'clear' parameter defaults to true, meaning by default the tool clears results. This is a significant side-effect omission that could lead agents to unintentionally destroy data.

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 sentence that conveys the core action and side effect without unnecessary words. It is well-structured and front-loaded, achieving maximum informational density.

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?

While the tool is simple with one parameter, the description lacks essential context such as the default destructive behavior, the format of the summary output, and whether results are permanently cleared. Without annotations or an output schema, these gaps make the tool under-specified for safe autonomous use.

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?

The input schema provides only a boolean 'clear' with default true and no description. The phrase 'optionally clear the collected results' adds some meaning by linking the parameter to the behavior, but it does not explain the default behavior or the exact effect of setting clear to false, leaving ambiguity.

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 uses a specific verb 'summarize' and identifies the resource ('every assertion recorded this plugin session'), clearly distinguishing it from sibling tools. It also mentions the optional clearing action, providing a complete purpose statement.

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 implies usage for reviewing assertion results after a test session, but it gives no explicit guidance on when to use it versus other tools or when not to clear results. The context is implied rather than stated.

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