Create A Company Action Plan Type

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

Annotations already indicate readOnlyHint=false and destructiveHint=false, so the description does not need to reiterate. It adds the HTTP 201 success response and API endpoint. However, it does not disclose any additional behavioral traits like authentication requirements or side effects beyond creation.

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 and front-loaded with the purpose. However, it has redundancy: 'Create a Company Action Plan Type' and 'Creates a new Action Plans' repeat similar info. Could be more concise.

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?

No output schema, but the description states it returns the created object on success. It provides the endpoint and API category. For a simple 3-parameter create tool, this is fairly complete, though it could mention the 'active' parameter's role more explicitly.

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 coverage is 100% with descriptions for all parameters. The description redundantly states required parameters (company_id, name) but adds no new semantic meaning 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 verb 'create' and the resource 'Company Action Plan Type'. It mentions returning the created object. However, it does not explicitly differentiate this tool from siblings like 'create_action_plan' or 'create_company_action_plan_templates', which are related but 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 says 'Use this to create a new Action Plans in Procore' and lists required parameters. But it does not provide guidance on when not to use this tool or mention alternative tools for related operations, such as creating an actual action plan instance.

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