List Budget View Snapshots

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

Even with readOnlyHint and other annotations, the description adds substantial behavioral context: 'Read-only — it changes nothing in Procore,' return format (JSON array), pagination behavior ('response reports how many pages remain'), and typical error statuses (401, 403, 404). This goes well beyond the 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 appropriately sized and front-loaded with the core function, then provides usage, return details, safety, errors, and required parameters. Every sentence adds value; no wasted words.

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 an 8-parameter list tool with rich annotations and no output schema, the description covers the essential aspects: purpose, usage, output format, pagination, error handling, required parameter, and API endpoint. It is fully sufficient for an agent to select and invoke this tool correctly.

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 adds extra meaning by highlighting 'You can filter by type' (relating to filters__snapshot_type), explaining pagination via page/per_page, and calling out 'Required parameters: project_id' — all beyond the schema text.

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 what the tool does: 'Returns a list of project-level snapshots for both project status and ad hoc.' It uses a specific verb (returns) and names the resource (budget view snapshots), and distinguishes itself from related list/detail tools by emphasizing discovery and ID lookup.

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?

It explicitly tells when to use this tool: 'Use this to discover budget view snapshots or to look up the id of one before calling a tool that needs it.' This is clear context, though it does not name alternate tools or exclusions.

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