list_reports

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

With no annotations, the description effectively communicates the read-only nature and scope (from any analyzed video). It does not disclose potential limitations like pagination or ordering, but the simplicity of the tool (no parameters) reduces the need for extensive behavioral details.

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, concise sentence with no wasted words. It front-loads the verb and resource, making it quick to parse.

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?

Given the tool has no parameters, an output schema exists, and sibling tools provide context, the description is sufficiently complete. It clearly conveys the tool's purpose without missing critical information.

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?

There are no parameters, so the input schema already covers everything. The description does not add parameter semantics, but the baseline for zero parameters is 4, as no additional explanation is needed.

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 lists all available report IDs from any analyzed video. It uses a specific verb 'list' and resource 'report ids', and the scope 'all available' differentiates it from sibling tools like get_report which retrieves a specific 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?

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It does not mention that the IDs can be used with get_report, nor does it specify when not to use it. The description only states what it does without usage context.

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