list_shared_reports

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

With no annotations, the description must disclose behavioral traits. It only mentions the filter parameter but does not describe pagination behavior, default parameters, or side effects. It does not state whether the tool is read-only or requires specific permissions.

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 extremely concise with two sentences. The first sentence states the core purpose, and the second adds essential parameter details. No superfluous information.

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 tool has 4 optional parameters and no output schema, the description is insufficient. It fails to explain pagination, default values for page/page_size, the behavior when workspace_id is null, or what the response contains. This incompleteness would hinder an agent's correct usage.

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 description coverage is 0%, so the description must elaborate on parameters. It only explains the shared_reports_filter parameter with its three valid values. The other three parameters (workspace_id, page, page_size) are not described, leaving significant gaps for an agent.

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 verb 'List' and the resource 'shared reports'. It mentions the scope as workspace-specific, which helps distinguish from other list tools like list_projects or list_invoices. However, it does not explicitly differentiate from sibling tools like get_shared_report or other list_* tools, leaving some ambiguity.

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 for retrieving a list of shared reports but provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives, such as get_shared_report for a single report. It lacks explicit when-not-to-use or prerequisite information.

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