List Bids Within A Bid Package

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

Annotations (readOnlyHint=true, destructiveHint=false, idempotentHint=true) already indicate safe read-only operation. Description adds concrete behavioral details: returns paginated JSON array, pagination controlled by page/per_page, includes pagination metadata, and specifies the API endpoint. 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?

Description is concise with no redundant information. Front-loaded with purpose. Could be slightly more structured (e.g., bullet points) but is efficient and clear for an agent.

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 no output schema, description adequately explains return format (paginated JSON array with metadata). Provides endpoint URL, required parameters, and pagination controls. Sufficient for an AI agent to invoke correctly without additional context.

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?

Input schema has 100% coverage, so baseline is 3. Description adds minimal extra meaning beyond schema fields—merely reiterates required parameters and briefly explains page/per_page purpose. Does not provide significant new semantic information.

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?

Clearly states verb 'list' and resource 'assigned Bids within a Bid Package'. Distinguishes from sibling tools like list_bids_within_a_company or list_bids_within_a_project by specifying the bid package context.

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?

Provides clear usage context: enumerating Bid Management records for paginated overview, finding IDs, or filtering. Lists required parameters (project_id, bid_package_id). However, does not explicitly mention when not to use this tool or suggest alternatives, which would raise the score.

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