List Equipment Maintenance Logs

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

Annotations declare safe behavior (readOnlyHint, idempotentHint), and description adds pagination behavior (page, per_page, metadata). It doesn't contradict annotations and provides additional context beyond the schema.

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 five sentences and includes extraneous API details (Procore API, endpoint) that are not essential for tool selection, making it slightly verbose for a simple list tool.

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?

Without an output schema, the description explains the return type (paginated JSON array) and metadata, but omits details about the record structure, which would be helpful for an agent to understand the response format.

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?

With 100% schema coverage, the baseline is 3. Description adds minimal value by repeating required company_id and mentioning pagination controls, but doesn't significantly enhance understanding 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 it returns a list of Equipment Maintenance Logs and specifies its use for enumerating Field Productivity records with pagination, but does not explicitly differentiate from similar list tools like list_equipment_logs or list_all_equipment_logs.

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 context (paginated overview, find IDs, filter by query) but lacks explicit guidance on when not to use or alternatives among sibling tools, leaving the agent to infer based on the resource name.

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