List Filter Options For Specification Section

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

The description is consistent with annotations (read-only, idempotent). It adds context about pagination and return type (JSON array), but does not disclose behavior beyond what annotations already provide. No contradictions.

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 (a few sentences) and front-loads the core purpose. It could be slightly trimmed, but overall it is efficient and well-structured.

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?

For a simple list tool with good schema coverage and annotations, the description provides sufficient context: return type, pagination, required parameter, and API reference. It lacks output schema but that's expected for this tool.

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?

All parameters are described in the input schema (100% coverage). The description adds no further meaning beyond what the schema already provides, so baseline score of 3 is appropriate.

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 returns filter options for a specific specification section, and links it to enumerating submittals with pagination. However, it does not explicitly differentiate from numerous sibling filter option tools, leaving some ambiguity.

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 gives some usage guidance (e.g., enumerating submittals, finding IDs), but lacks explicit when-not-to-use instructions or comparisons with alternative filter option tools. The context 'Procore API: Project Management > Submittals' is helpful.

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