run_report

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

With no annotations, the description must disclose behavioral traits, but it only states 'Execute an ERPNext report.' It does not indicate whether the tool is read-only or destructive, what it returns, or any permissions or side effects. This is insufficient for an agent to understand the tool's behavior.

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 short sentence, which is concise but lacks structure. It does not front-load key information or provide any additional details beyond the minimal meaning.

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 two parameters, no output schema, and no annotations, the description is critically incomplete. It fails to explain what executing a report produces, any output format, or side effects, leaving the agent with insufficient context to use the tool effectively.

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%, with both parameters already documented in the input schema (e.g., 'Name of the report' and 'Optional JSON string of report filters'). The description adds no additional semantics beyond the schema, meeting the baseline for high coverage.

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 a specific verb-resource pair: 'Execute an ERPNext report.' The tool's name and description clearly indicate it runs a report, distinguishing it from siblings that create, delete, or list documents. However, it does not differentiate from 'run_method,' which might also execute actions.

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 usage guidelines are provided. The description does not specify when to use this tool versus alternatives like 'get_list_with_summary' or 'run_method,' nor does it mention prerequisites or context for execution.

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