List Project Action Plan Template Test Record Requests

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

Annotations already indicate read-only, safe, idempotent. The description adds value by explaining pagination behavior, return format (JSON array with metadata), and required parameters, which goes beyond the annotations.

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 three sentences, front-loaded with purpose, then usage, then API details. Every sentence adds value with no redundant information.

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?

Given the complexity (10 parameters, 100% schema coverage, annotations for safety, no output schema), the description is complete: it explains pagination, filtering, required parameter, endpoint, and return format (paginated JSON array).

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%, so baseline is 3. The description mentions pagination and that project_id is required, but does not add meaning beyond what the schema already describes for other parameters.

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 lists Project Action Plan Template Test Record Requests with a specific verb (list), mentions pagination, filtering, and finding IDs. It includes the Procore API endpoint, making the purpose very clear.

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?

Provides explicit usage guidance: 'Use this to enumerate Action Plans when you need a paginated overview, to find IDs, or to filter by query parameters.' It specifies when to use but does not differentiate from sibling tools like list_action_plan_test_record_requests, so not perfect.

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