list_reports

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint and idempotentHint, so the description only needs to add context. It adds that the tool returns IDs only and that it aggregates across any analyzed video, which is useful behavioral nuance. It does not cover ordering or result size, but for a simple list operation with output schema, this is sufficient.

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?

A single sentence of eight words that is front-loaded with the action and resource. Every word adds value: 'all available' indicates completeness, 'report ids' specifies the return type, and 'from any analyzed video' defines the data source. No waste 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?

Given zero parameters, an output schema (which explains return structure), and annotations covering safety, the description is complete. It provides the necessary context to understand the tool's purpose and scope without needing further elaboration.

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?

The tool has 0 parameters, so the baseline is 4. The description correctly implies no inputs are needed, and the empty schema confirms this. There is no ambiguity or missing parameter information.

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 uses the specific verb 'List' with the resource 'report ids' and clarifies scope ('from any analyzed video'). It clearly distinguishes from siblings like get_report (which retrieves a specific report) and list_actions/list_skills (which list other entity types).

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: you use this when you need the list of available report IDs. However, it does not explicitly state when not to use it or mention alternatives such as get_report for retrieving a specific report. The guidance is implicit rather than explicit.

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