List Asset System States

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

The description explicitly states 'Read-only — it changes nothing in Procore,' which aligns with the readOnlyHint annotation. It goes beyond annotations by detailing common failure modes (401, 403, 404) and the company_id default, providing rich behavioral context.

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 dense and front-loaded with purpose, but contains a slight redundancy/conflict between 'Returns a List' and 'Returns a single JSON object'. Every sentence otherwise contributes useful information about defaults, safety, errors, and endpoint.

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?

The description covers purpose, usage, read-only behavior, error semantics, and endpoint, which is comprehensive. No output schema exists, but the description only vaguely states 'Returns a single JSON object' without detailing its structure. This is a minor gap given the 'full field set' phrasing.

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 both parameters described. The description adds value by noting company_id is required and defaults to the procore_set_config value, which is not in the schema. Accept-Language is not further explained, but the schema already covers it.

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 returns asset system states for a given company and mentions 'full field set'. However, it ambiguously says 'Returns a List' and then 'Returns a single JSON object', creating slight confusion about the response shape.

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 explicit context: 'Use this when you already know which asset system state you want and need its full field set.' It also explains the company_id default behavior, but does not mention alternatives or exclusions.

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