get_shared_report

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

With no annotations, the description carries full burden. It mentions fetching data and optional overrides, but does not disclose whether it is read-only, permissions needed, side effects, error handling, or response format. Incomplete behavioral disclosure.

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?

Two concise sentences, front-loaded with the core purpose. Every word adds value, no redundancy. Efficiently communicates the main operation and key optional parameters.

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 8 parameters, no output schema, and no annotations, the description is too minimal. It lacks context on pagination parameters, expected output format, error scenarios, and prerequisites. Incomplete for an agent to confidently invoke.

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 coverage is 0%, so the description must compensate. It adds meaning for date_range_start/end, sort_column/sort_order, and export_type with enumerated values (JSON/PDF/CSV/XLSX/ZIP). However, page and page_size are not explained, leaving gaps for 2 of 8 parameters.

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/fetches data of a shared report by ID, and mentions optional overrides for range, sort, and format. However, it does not differentiate from sibling tools like 'list_shared_reports' or other generate report functions.

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 explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It implies usage for a specific shared report ID with optional overrides, but does not state when not to use it or provide context about sibling tools.

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