Create Prime Change Order Line Item

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

Annotations already indicate readOnlyHint=false. The description adds that it returns the created object (HTTP 201), but falsely claims it creates a Prime Contract instead of a line item. This misrepresentation 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 relatively short but contains repetition and an error. It could be condensed to one clear sentence. Not egregious but not optimal.

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 exists, but the description briefly mentions 'returns the created object.' It does not explain the object structure, error scenarios, or prerequisites (e.g., change order must exist). The misleading Prime Contracts reference further reduces 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?

Schema coverage is 100%, so all parameters have descriptions. The description merely lists required parameters without adding semantic value beyond the schema. Baseline score of 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 first sentence clearly states 'Creates a line item for a given prime change order,' but the following sentences incorrectly describe it as creating a new Prime Contracts, which confuses the tool's purpose. This ambiguity lowers clarity.

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 no guidance on when to use this tool vs. alternatives like create_prime_change_order or create_prime_contract. It also misstates the tool's function, offering little useful context for selection.

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