update_report

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

Annotations already provide readOnlyHint, destructiveHint, idempotentHint, and openWorldHint. The description adds the permission requirement (WRITE_ENABLED=true), which is useful but does not significantly extend beyond what annotations convey. There is no contradiction with annotations.

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 that includes the essential verb, resource, and a crucial requirement. No unnecessary words or redundancy.

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, and the description does not mention what the tool returns (e.g., updated report object or success status). For a mutation tool, this omission makes it less complete. The description also does not explain side effects beyond the openWorldHint annotation.

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?

Input schema has 100% coverage with clear descriptions for both parameters (sys_id and fields). The description does not add any additional meaning or context for these parameters beyond the schema, so baseline 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 the action (update) and the resource (report definition) with a verb+resource structure. It also distinguishes itself from sibling tools like create_report and get_report by specifying 'existing saved report definition'.

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 includes a prerequisite (WRITE_ENABLED=true) which helps the agent know when it's safe to use. However, it does not explicitly mention when to use this tool versus alternatives like create_report or other update tools, though the resource specificity implicitly provides that guidance.

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