Convert Private Layer To Public

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

Annotations provide neutral hints, and the description adds valuable behavioral context: it creates a new Document Markup record and returns HTTP 201 with the created object. This clarifies the non-destructive creation nature and success response beyond what annotations imply.

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 relatively concise with a few well-paced sentences. It front-loads the main action. It could omit some redundant details (e.g., 'Procore API: Project Management > Document Markup'), 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 simple tool with 3 parameters and no output schema, the description adequately explains the purpose, required parameters, return value (HTTP 201 and created object), and API endpoint. It covers all necessary context for correct invocation.

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 descriptions. The description reiterates the required parameters and adds endpoint context (e.g., 'URL path parameter'), but does not significantly enhance understanding beyond the schema.

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 converts a private layer to public, specifying the verb 'convert', the resource 'private layer', and the outcome 'accessible to all project users'. It distinguishes itself from sibling CRUD tools by describing a specific conversion action.

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 using it for the 'convert private action' on Document Markup records and lists required parameters, but it does not provide explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives or when not to use it. There is no comparison with sibling tools.

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