List Change Order Statuses

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and idempotentHint=true. The description adds that the response is paginated (JSON array with metadata), which is useful context beyond annotations. However, it does not elaborate on rate limits, authentication requirements, or other behavioral traits. The added value is modest.

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 front-loaded with the purpose and includes details like required parameters and API endpoint. However, it includes extraneous information (Procore API reference, endpoint path) that could be omitted or moved. The sentence about 'Returns a paginated JSON array of Change Orders' is redundant with earlier statements. Could be more concise.

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?

With no output schema, the description compensates by stating the return format (paginated JSON array) and mentioning pagination metadata. However, it fails to clarify whether the array contains 'Change Order Statuses' or 'Change Orders', which is a critical gap. For a simple list tool with high schema coverage, the description is adequate but the inconsistency harms completeness.

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%, but the description clarifies the purpose of page and per_page ('control pagination') and notes that the response includes pagination metadata. This semantic addition gives the agent a better understanding of how to use these parameters effectively.

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 initially states 'Return a list of all Change Order Statuses', but later says 'Returns a paginated JSON array of Change Orders'. This inconsistency between 'statuses' and 'orders' creates ambiguity about the actual resource being listed. While the verb and resource are somewhat clear, the contradiction undermines clarity.

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 usage scenarios like 'enumerate Change Orders when you need a paginated overview, to find IDs, or to filter by query parameters', but does not mention when not to use this tool or suggest alternatives. Given the large number of sibling list tools, explicit exclusions would improve guidance.

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