mes_generate_report

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must fully disclose behavior. It only states 'return text' without revealing whether the tool is read-only, requires specific permissions, or has side effects. The lack of detail leaves significant gaps for an agent.

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, efficient sentence with no redundancy. While it is very concise, it sacrifices necessary detail, but conciseness itself is achieved.

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 simplicity (one parameter, no annotations), the description is still incomplete. It does not specify the report content, format expectations, or any constraints. The presence of an output schema is not leveraged to explain the return value.

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?

With 0% schema description coverage, the description should compensate by explaining parameters. However, it does not mention 'doc_id' at all, leaving the agent to guess its purpose (e.g., the document to generate the report from). No additional meaning is provided 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 the tool generates a 'Markdown MES report' and returns text, providing a specific verb and resource. It distinguishes from sibling tools like 'mes_export_json' by specifying the output format (Markdown vs. likely JSON), though it does not elaborate on what 'MES' means.

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 given on when to use this tool versus alternatives like 'document_export' or 'mes_export_json'. There is no mention of prerequisites, excluded cases, or context for selection.

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