Show Action Plan Reference

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, destructiveHint=false, and idempotentHint=true. The description adds no behavioral traits beyond stating it returns a JSON object. Since annotations cover safety, the description does not need to add much, but it could mention pagination behavior (page/per_page parameters).

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 concise with two main sentences plus API endpoint info. It front-loads the purpose and includes helpful developer context (Procore API section, endpoint URL). Slightly more than minimal but justified.

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 there is no output schema, the description adequately states it returns a JSON object. It covers the purpose and required parameters. It does not explain the effect of pagination parameters (page, per_page) or that the response is a single object, but for a show endpoint this is sufficient.

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 schema already defines parameters. The description mentions required parameters (project_id, id) but does not add meaning beyond the schema, especially for page and per_page. Baseline 3 is appropriate.

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 an Action Plan Reference and fetches full details by identifier. It uses specific verbs (returns, fetch) and identifies the resource uniquely, distinguishing it from other show_* tools in the sibling list.

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 explicitly says 'Use this to fetch the full details of a specific Action Plans by its identifier,' providing clear context for when to use it. However, it does not mention when not to use it or provide alternatives, such as list_action_plan_references.

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