Read a report

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and openWorldHint=false, so safety is covered. The description adds nothing about what is actually returned (a status flag? a download URL? an expiry?), whether the file is streamed inline, or whether readiness is polled repeatedly, leaving the most operationally important behavior undisclosed.

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?

It is short with no filler, but it is an unanchored fragment with no subject or verb and no front-loaded statement of what the tool does. Conciseness here comes at the cost of clarity rather than from efficiency.

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?

There is no output schema, so the description carries the burden of explaining return values, yet it only gestures at them ('whether a report is ready, and how to get the file'). For a polling-or-fetch tool whose entire utility is the shape of its response, this is materially incomplete.

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 a single parameter and 100% schema description coverage, the schema fully documents report_id including its pattern, so baseline 3 applies. The description contributes no additional meaning about the identifier or its format.

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 identifies the resource (a report) and two concerns: whether it is ready and how to obtain the file, which adds meaning beyond the bare name. However, it is a noun-phrase fragment with no verb, so it never states an action an agent can map to a call, and it does not distinguish itself from siblings like save_report_file or create_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?

There is no guidance on when to call this versus create_report, save_report_file, or get_share_link, all of which touch adjacent report/file concerns. The phrase 'how to get the file' hints at a post-readiness step but never states the condition or the alternative.

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