generate_report

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

With no annotations, the description discloses key behaviors: async execution, immediate task ID return, polling for result, cancellation via tasks/cancel, and demo specifics. It misses details like concurrency limits or what happens on duplicate calls.

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?

Four sentences cover the essential points without repetition, though the demo note could be integrated more smoothly. It is appropriately front-loaded and 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?

The description omits the topic parameter inconsistency and does not specify the output format or structure of the report, which is crucial for an agent to process the result. Given no output schema, more detail was needed.

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 input schema is empty (no parameters), yet the description mentions 'given topic', implying a parameter that doesn't exist. This is a direct contradiction, misleading agents about required input.

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 an analytics report for a topic, which is a specific verb+resource combination. It naturally distinguishes from sibling tools like get_config, greet_user, and search functions, which serve different purposes.

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 advises using this for comprehensive data analysis tasks, providing clear context. However, it does not explicitly mention when not to use it or suggest alternatives, lacking exclusions that would earn a 5.

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