Get Groups

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, destructiveHint=false, idempotentHint=true. The description adds context beyond annotations: it returns a paginated JSON array with pagination metadata, requires company_id and project_id, and mentions Procore API path. 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 reasonably concise at 5 sentences, front-loading the core purpose. However, it includes redundant information (e.g., 'Returns a paginated JSON array of Document Markup records' and later 'Endpoint...'), which could be tightened without losing clarity.

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?

Given the high schema coverage (100%) and rich annotations (readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, openWorldHint), the description is complete enough. It covers what the tool returns, required inputs, pagination behavior, and authentication hint, satisfying the contextual needs for an AI agent.

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 the baseline is 3. The description lists required parameters (company_id, project_id) and hints at pagination parameters (page, per_page) but does not add significant meaning beyond the schema's descriptions. It omits explanations for filter parameters.

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 that the tool returns all accessible markup groups for a specific company and project, with pagination and filtering support. It uses specific verb 'Returns' and resource 'markup groups' and distinguishes from numerous sibling tools by its scope (public + user's private) and context (company and project IDs).

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 explicitly says when to use this tool: 'to fetch the full details of a specific Document Markup records by its identifier.' It also notes that pagination is controlled via page and per_page, and lists required parameters. However, it does not explicitly state when not to use this tool or mention alternatives among siblings.

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