Get All Resource Requests In A Company

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, destructiveHint=false, idempotentHint=true, so the behavioral bar is low. The description adds that it is a pageable endpoint and returns a JSON object, which is useful but does not go beyond standard expectations.

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 contains a misleading and extraneous sentence about fetching specific records, which undermines clarity. It could be more concise and front-loaded with essential information.

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?

Despite low complexity, the description lacks context about what resource requests are, pagination behavior, and response structure (no output schema). The misleading specific-record sentence further detracts from 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 description coverage is 100%, so the schema already documents company_id, page, and per_page well. The description only repeats that company_id is required, adding no new semantic meaning.

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 states it retrieves all resource requests across a company (specific verb+resource+scope) and notes it's pageable. However, it also confusingly says 'Use this to fetch the full details of a specific Resource Planning records by its identifier,' which contradicts the list nature of the endpoint and may mislead the agent.

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 versus sibling tools like 'get_all_resource_requests_for_a_single_project' or alternatives. The misleading sentence about fetching specific records does not help and could cause incorrect tool selection.

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