List Project Checklist Templates

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

Adds significant behavioral context beyond annotations: permission requirements ('read-only and above'), error payload HTTP statuses (401, 403, 404), pagination behavior, and the default for project_id from config. Reinforces read-only nature with 'changes nothing in Procore'. No contradiction with 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 long but every sentence earns its place: purpose, filtering reference, permissions, use case, default, return format, pagination, read-only statement, error handling, required params, and API path. It is front-loaded with the main purpose and remains 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?

No output schema exists, so the description compensates by explaining return type (JSON array) and pagination response behavior. It also covers permissions, error cases, required parameters, and API endpoint context, making it complete for a list tool with a well-documented 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 coverage is 100%, so the baseline is 3. Description adds extra meaning by noting project_id defaults to procore_set_config when omitted and explaining page/per_page pagination control, which supplements the schema descriptions rather than repeating them.

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?

Description clearly states the verb and resource: 'Returns a list of all Inspection Checklist Templates for a specified Project.' It identifies project-level scope, distinguishing it from sibling company-level template tools. The use case 'discover project checklist templates or to look up the id of one' further clarifies its purpose.

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 when-to-use guidance: 'Use this to discover project checklist templates or to look up the id of one before calling a tool that needs it.' It also references filtering documentation. However, it does not explicitly name alternatives or state when not to use, though 'for a specified Project' implies project-level vs company-level distinction.

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