List Project State Codes

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

Annotations already declare readOnly/idempotent/non-destructive, but the description goes beyond them: it explains pagination behavior (page/per_page and pages remaining), return format (JSON array), default project_id from config, and error payload details (401/403/404). These are meaningful behavioral disclosures not captured in 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?

Every sentence carries information: purpose, use case, defaults, return format, pagination, safety, error handling, required params, and API endpoint. It is front-loaded with the main purpose and stays focused without fluff.

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?

With no output schema, the description compensates by describing the JSON array return and pagination metadata. It also covers error behavior and endpoint reference. For a read-only lookup tool, this is complete enough for an agent to select and invoke it correctly.

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 adds value by explaining the project_id default behavior when omitted and clarifies how pagination parameters work. It repeats required params but reinforces them with context about lookup use case.

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 'Return[s] the list of states for a country' for project state codes, with a specific verb and resource. It explicitly frames the tool's role as discovery/lookup aide before other tools, distinguishing it from sibling list tools like list_project_types or list_project_regions.

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 says 'Use this to discover project state codes or to look up the id of one before calling a tool that needs it.' This gives a clear when-to-use context. It doesn't name alternative tools, but the intended usage is unambiguous. It also notes the project_id default from procore_set_config, adding situational context.

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