List Change Events

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

Annotations already declare read-only, idempotent, and non-destructive behavior. The description adds valuable context about pagination ('page and per_page control pagination and the response reports how many pages remain') and error handling ('401 when the token has expired, 403 without tool permission, 404 when an id does not resolve'), which are not covered by 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 efficiently structured with clear sections: purpose, usage, return format, safety, errors, and API reference. At 7 sentences, it is longer than the ideal but every sentence adds useful information without redundancy.

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 30 parameters and no output schema, the description adequately covers what the tool returns (JSON array), pagination, and error scenarios. The schema handles parameter details, and the description provides enough behavioral context for an agent to use the tool effectively.

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 all 30 parameters have descriptions. The description only restates that project_id is required and mentions page/per_page for pagination, which the schema already covers. It adds no new parameter-level meaning beyond the schema.

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 a specific verb and resource: 'Lists the change events recorded in Procore.' It also distinguishes its purpose by mentioning it can be used to look up an id before calling another tool, which sets it apart from show/update/delete siblings.

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?

Explicitly says 'Use this to discover change events or to look up the id of one before calling a tool that needs it,' providing clear when-to-use context. It doesn't name alternatives or exclusions, but the guidance is sufficient for most scenarios.

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