Calculate Number Of Inspections To Create Based On Schedule

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, destructiveHint=false, idempotentHint=true. The description adds pagination details and endpoint, but the claim 'returns a paginated JSON array of Inspections' conflicts with the tool's purpose (calculating count) and the endpoint name ('calculate_total_inspections_count'). This inaccuracy reduces transparency.

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 four sentences long. It front-loads the purpose and includes required parameters, but the sentence 'Use this to read information about Inspections from Procore' is vague and adds little value. The inconsistency with output type weakens conciseness.

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 6 parameters, no output schema, and medium complexity, the description covers endpoint, API section, and pagination. However, it fails to clarify the return type (count vs array) and does not explain what the calculated number represents. Moderate completeness.

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?

Input schema has 100% coverage with clear descriptions for all 6 parameters. The description redundantly lists required parameters but adds no additional meaning beyond the schema. Baseline 3 is appropriate.

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 states 'Calculates the total number of Inspections to create' but later says 'Returns a paginated JSON array of Inspections', creating inconsistency. The verb 'calculates' and resource are clear, but the contradiction with the output undermines clarity. Differentiates from sibling 'calculate_when_first_inspection' by focusing on count, but not fully distinct.

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 provides minimal usage guidance: 'Use this to read information about Inspections from Procore' and lists required parameters. It does not specify when to use this tool versus alternatives (e.g., other checklist schedule tools), nor does it include exclusions or contexts. No explicit differentiation from siblings.

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