describe_report_objects

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden and discloses key behavioral traits: it reads a bundled catalog (no network) and is computationally cheap. It does not describe return format or side effects, but the presence of an output schema mitigates that gap.

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 only two sentences: the first establishes the tool's purpose, and the second provides usage guidance. Every word contributes value, and the key information is front-loaded.

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 description covers the tool's purpose, usage timing, resource type, and cost/network characteristics. Given the output schema, the agent has everything needed to select and invoke this tool correctly within the set of sibling report tools.

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?

All three parameters already have rich descriptions in the input schema (e.g., 'Restrict the catalog to one category'). The tool description does not add further parameter-level meaning, but since schema coverage is 100%, a 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 a specific verb ('Discover') and resource ('Visual Analytics report can contain — operations and objects'). It also distinguishes itself from siblings by explicitly mentioning 'before calling apply_report_operations', positioning it as a learning tool for report construction.

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?

It gives explicit when-to-use guidance: 'Call this to learn how to build a report before calling apply_report_operations'. It also contrasts with guessing, saying it is the 'cheap way to look up an object's data roles', which reinforces its role as the preferred lookup method.

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