generate_report

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden of disclosing behavioral traits. It mentions output formats but does not disclose side effects, required permissions, whether input data is mandatory, or any limitations. The description adds minimal behavioral context 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 concise and front-loaded, using a single sentence to state the tool's purpose and output formats. Every word is meaningful, with no redundant or filler content.

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?

The tool is moderately complex (4 parameters, 2 required, enums), but the description is sparse. There is no output schema or annotations, so the description should explain what the report contains, how 'data' is used, or what 'structured' means. It fails to provide this context, leaving significant gaps for the 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 100%, so the baseline is 3. The description adds no additional meaning to parameters; it only mentions formats, which are already enumerated in the schema. The schema itself fully documents all parameters, so this score is appropriate.

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's function: generating a structured wealth analysis report in PDF, JSON, or Markdown. This specific verb+resource combination distinguishes it from sibling analysis tools (e.g., analyze_portfolio, assess_risk), which focus on analysis rather than report generation.

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 no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It does not mention prerequisites, exclusions, or the relationship to sibling tools. Users must infer that it is for report generation after analysis, but no explicit context is given.

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