List Work Order Contract Line Items

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

Annotations already indicate readOnly and idempotent. The description adds context on pagination (page/per_page), conditional inclusion of change event info, and return format (JSON array with metadata). 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 relatively concise, with the core purpose in the first sentence. It includes a link to filtering documentation. Minor verbosity on change event condition, but overall 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?

Covers required parameters, filtering, pagination, and endpoint details. No output schema provided, but description mentions return format and pagination metadata. Links to external docs fill gaps.

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?

The input schema has 100% coverage with descriptions for all 10 parameters. The description adds value by noting required parameters and pagination control, but the schema already explains each parameter well. Baseline 3 applies.

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 a list of line items for a given work order contract and project. It uses specific verbs and resource names, distinguishing it from sibling tools like list_work_order_contracts and list_commitment_contract_line_items.

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 suggests using it for enumeration when needing pagination or filtering, and mentions required parameters. However, it does not explicitly state when not to use it or compare with similar list tools among siblings.

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