Create Attachment

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

Annotations indicate non-read-only and non-destructive behavior. The description adds that success returns HTTP 201 and the created object, which is helpful. However, it does not disclose error handling, side effects, or the multipart/form-data requirement beyond what is in the schema. No contradiction 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 relatively short but contains redundant and incorrect phrasing ('Use this to create a new Incidents in Procore'). The structure is adequate but could be more precise and eliminate repetition.

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?

Covers basic purpose, required parameters, and endpoint. Lacks explanation of the optional 'run_configurable_validations' parameter, though the schema covers it. No output schema, but description mentions return object. Overall minimally complete but with misleading elements.

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%, so baseline is 3. The description lists required parameters but does not add significant meaning beyond the schema descriptions. It mentions the attachment parameter's multipart/form-data requirement, which is already in 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 creates an attachment for a specified incident. However, the phrase 'Use this to create a new Incidents in Procore' is confusing and appears to be a copy-paste error, slightly diminishing clarity. The tool is differentiated from siblings by its version in the name, but the description does not address version differences.

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?

No guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. The description includes a misleading statement about creating incidents instead of attachments. There is no mention of when not to use this tool or any alternative tools.

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