List Available RFI Responsible Contractor Filter Options

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

Annotations already provide readOnlyHint, destructiveHint, idempotentHint. Description adds that it returns a JSON array and gives endpoint path. It does not explain pagination behavior (page/per_page parameters) or response structure, but annotations cover safety profile.

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?

Four sentences with no wasted words. First sentence states purpose, next two give usage context, last provides API reference. Information is front-loaded and efficiently presented.

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?

For a simple filter options tool, description is mostly complete. It mentions return type (JSON array), required parameter, and endpoint. Minor gap: no description of the response structure (e.g., keys in each option), but no output schema exists to compensate.

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%: all three parameters are described in the schema. Description only repeats that project_id is required, adding no new meaning beyond the schema. Baseline 3 is appropriate for full coverage.

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 it returns a list of responsible contractor filter fields/options for RFIs on a project. It distinguishes from siblings by specifying the responsible contractor filter and enumerating usage scenarios (paginated overview, finding IDs, filtering).

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?

Description tells when to use: to enumerate RFI records for pagination, finding IDs, or filtering. It mentions required parameter and Procore API reference. However, it does not explicitly state when NOT to use or name alternatives, which would be helpful given many sibling filter tools.

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