List Change Order Change Reasons

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

The description adds value beyond annotations by detailing the return format (paginated JSON array with pagination metadata) and noting it's a GET endpoint from Procore API v2.0. Annotations already indicate readOnly, destructiveFalse, idempotentTrue, and openWorldHint, and the description aligns with these without contradiction.

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 concise, with each sentence serving a purpose. It is front-loaded with the main purpose, then provides usage context, and finally includes API details. There is no redundant or extraneous information.

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 the simplicity of the tool (3 parameters, no output schema), the description fully covers the necessary context. It explains the expected response (paginated JSON array with metadata), the required parameters, pagination control, and the underlying API endpoint. This is sufficient for an agent to invoke the 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% with descriptions for all three parameters. The description reinforces the required parameter (company_id) and explains how to control pagination using page and per_page. It also clarifies the parameter types (URL path vs. query string), adding value 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 the tool's purpose: 'List All Possible Change Order Change Reasons for a Specified Company.' It uses a specific verb (list), identifies the resource (change order change reasons), and specifies the scope (for a specified company). This distinguishes it from sibling tools, as no other tool in the list targets the same resource.

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 guidance on when to use this tool: 'Use this to enumerate Change Orders when you need a paginated overview, to find IDs, or to filter by query parameters.' It does not explicitly mention when not to use it or list alternatives, but the context is clear and sufficient for an AI agent to decide.

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