List Checklist (Inspection) Comments

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, and destructiveHint false. The description goes beyond annotations by explicitly stating it is read-only, describing error payloads with common HTTP statuses (401, 403, 404), and explaining pagination behavior including page reporting.

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 six sentences, each serving a distinct purpose: primary function, use case, default parameter, return format, read-only nature, error semantics, required parameters, and API reference. There is no filler or 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?

With no output schema, the description compensates by specifying the return is a JSON array, explaining pagination and page count reporting, and detailing error responses. It also identifies the API category and endpoint. The parameter semantics are fully covered by the schema.

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 description coverage is 100%, so the baseline is 3. The description adds value beyond the schema by noting that project_id defaults to the value from procore_set_config and that page/per_page control pagination with the response reporting how many pages remain.

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 states 'Returns the Checklist Comments from Checklists (Inspections) on the Project' with a specific verb and resource. It also distinguishes from siblings by explaining the use case for discovering comments and looking up IDs before calling other tools.

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 use guidance: 'Use this to discover checklist inspection comments or to look up the id of one before calling a tool that needs it.' This gives clear context for when to use it, though it does not explicitly name alternatives or specify when not to use it.

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