Check PDF Generation Status

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, destructiveHint, and idempotentHint. The description adds beyond that by specifying it returns a JSON object with file contents or download URL, and provides the endpoint URL pattern. No contradictions with annotations.

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 composed of four sentences that sequentially cover purpose, zone restriction, use case, return value, required parameters, and API reference. It is well-structured and front-loaded, though slightly repetitive (e.g., 'for Commitments' appears twice).

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 lack of output schema, the description adequately explains the return value and endpoint details. However, it does not explain how pagination parameters (page, per_page) affect results or differentiate this version from sibling tools.

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% description coverage for all 5 parameters. The description only lists required parameters (company_id, project_id, commitment_co_batch_id) and mentions the URL path structure, but does not add additional 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 checks the status of PDF generation for a Commitment Change Order Batch, with a specific verb and resource. It also explains the return value (downloadable file or export URL) for Commitments.

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 mentions the tool is only supported in Procore Zones US01 and US02, and implies it is for checking status. However, it does not provide guidance on when to use this version over sibling tools (e.g., other v2.0.x versions) or when not to use it.

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