build_drivers_report

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

No annotations provided, so the description carries full burden. It details report components and notes each call produces one sheet, but fails to disclose that the target sheet will be replaced if it already exists (schema states 'Replaced if it already exists'), creating a minor contradiction with 'Drops onto a new sheet'. No mention of prerequisites or auth needs.

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 detailed and front-loaded with the main action, but slightly verbose with full sentence examples. Could be trimmed without losing clarity, but overall efficient.

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?

For a complex report generator, the description covers all report elements and notes one output per call. Output schema exists, so return values are covered. Lacks explicit prerequisites (e.g., must have simulation data), but sibling tools like run_simulation provide context.

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 100%, so baseline is 3. The description repeats some parameter info (e.g., output_name usage) but does not add significant new meaning beyond what the schema already provides.

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 builds a single-sheet drivers report for sensitivity analysis, listing specific components (key findings, tornado chart, ranking table, etc.) and contrasts it with the broader executive dashboard, distinguishing it from siblings like build_executive_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?

The description explicitly says 'Use this when the user asks for an uncertainty-drivers report rather than the broader executive dashboard,' directly guiding when to use this tool vs. the sibling build_executive_report.

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