List Of Actual Production Quantity Ids

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

Annotations already indicate readOnlyHint=true, destructiveHint=false. The description adds pagination behavior and API endpoint details, which is helpful. However, the inconsistency between 'IDs' and 'records' undermines clarity about what the tool actually returns.

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 brief (four sentences), tightly focused, and front-loaded with the key action. Every sentence serves a purpose without unnecessary detail.

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?

The description provides purpose, pagination info, required parameter, and API reference. However, with no output schema, it fails to fully describe the return format (e.g., whether it returns an array of IDs or full records), leaving a gap in 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 description coverage is 100%, so the schema already documents parameters. The description only reiterates that project_id is required, adding no new meaning 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 Actual Production Quantity Ids, establishing its purpose. However, it later ambiguously says it returns a 'paginated JSON array of Field Productivity records,' contradicting the initial statement and causing confusion about whether it returns IDs or full records.

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 cases: 'when you need a paginated overview, to find IDs, or to filter by query parameters.' It does not, however, contrast this tool with siblings like list_all_actual_production_quantities, which would help an agent decide between them.

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