Create Salesforce Report

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

Annotations already include idempotentHint=true, readOnlyHint=false, and destructiveHint=false. The description adds that reports are created in a specified folder or personal folder by default, and lists supported formats, which is useful context. However, it does not disclose potential side effects like overwriting existing reports, permission requirements, or whether retries could create duplicates. It adds some value but not rich behavioral detail.

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?

Three tightly written sentences that front-load the core action and include supported formats, required inputs, and folder default. No filler or redundant phrasing; every sentence 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?

Given the tool's complexity (9 parameters, 4 required, no output schema), the description covers the main selection criteria (formats, required fields, filters) and folder default, but it does not explain return values, error handling, or any prerequisites. Without an output schema, the description should mention what the tool returns (e.g., report ID or URL), which is a notable gap.

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 a bit of color by giving examples for reportType ('Accounts, Opportunities') and mentioning the default folder for folderName, but these are largely redundant with the schema descriptions. It provides marginal added meaning beyond the schema.

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 it creates a Salesforce Report using the Report metadata type, which is a specific verb+resource. It distinguishes from similar creation tools like sf_create_report_type by focusing on the Report itself, though it doesn't explicitly contrast with siblings. The phrase 'Specify the report type' could be mildly confusing given the sibling tool name, but overall purpose is clear.

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 by describing what the tool does and mentions the default folder behavior, but it does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives (e.g., sf_create_report_type, sf_create_dashboard). No exclusions or when-not-to-use guidance is provided.

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