resources.list_reports

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

With no annotations present, the description carries the full burden of disclosing behavior. It clearly states what the tool does ('List all files currently stored under reports/resources/') and what it returns (filename, size, served URL), which is transparent for a read-only enumeration operation. It does not explicitly state that it is non-mutating, but 'List' strongly implies that, and no other side effects are suggested.

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, front-loaded sentence that states the action, the exact scope, and the return fields. Every word earns its place; there is no filler or repetition of the tool name.

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?

This is a zero-parameter, read-only listing tool with no output schemaasi, but the description covers both input scope and expected return values. Given the low complexity, there is no missing information that an agent needs in order to call it correctly.

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 tool has zero parameters, and the schema coverage is effectively 100% since the schema declares no properties. With 0 params, the baseline is 4. The description adds no parameter syntax, and none is needed for this stateless list operation.

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 ('List') with an exact resource path ('all files currently stored under reports/resources/'), making the tool's scope unambiguous. It also names the return fields (filename, size, served URL), which helps distinguish it from generic files.list and from report management tools like resources.add_report or resources.delete_report.

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 this tool is used when enumerating files already stored under reports/resources/, but it provides no explicit when-to-use guidance or alternatives. There is no mention of when to prefer files.list or resources.export_report instead, so the usage context is only inferred from the resource path.

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