generate_report

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

No annotations are provided, and the description lacks behavioral details such as whether the tool is read-only, destructive, or requires permissions. For a report generation tool, the absence of mutation warnings or safety context leaves the agent uninformed about side effects.

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 with no wasted words, front-loading the key action and output format. Every word earns its place.

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 lacks an output schema and annotations, and the description does not specify what the tool returns (e.g., a Markdown string, a file path). It adequately describes input but leaves output behavior unexplained, limiting completeness for an aggregation tool.

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 coverage is 100% (parameter 'data' described as 'The aggregated ReconReport data structure'). The description adds no extra meaning beyond the schema; baseline score of 3 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 aggregates all tool outputs into a structured Markdown recon report. It uses a specific verb ('aggregates') and resource ('tool outputs', 'Markdown recon report'), and distinguishes itself from sibling tools which are individual reconnaissance tools.

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 after running sibling tools but provides no explicit guidance on when to use or not use this tool, nor alternative tools. Usage context is inferred but not stated.

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