Show An Equipment Make

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

Annotations already provide readOnlyHint=true and destructiveHint=false. The description adds context by stating it returns a JSON object and implicitly indicates a GET request via the endpoint. No contradictions 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 three sentences and front-loads the core action. However, the phrase 'Field Productivity records' is slightly vague and could be more direct. Still efficient overall.

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 full schema coverage and annotations, the description adequately covers purpose, required parameters, and endpoint. It does not need to detail output since no output schema exists. Minor gaps like missing explicit HTTP method.

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 description adds little beyond stating required parameters (company_id, id). It provides URL path context but does not elaborate on parameter meaning beyond what the schema already covers.

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 returns detailed information about a specific equipment make, using a specific verb ('Return') and resource. It distinguishes from sibling tools like show_an_equipment_model and show_an_equipment_type by explicitly naming 'equipment make' and providing the endpoint.

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 tells when to use the tool ('fetch full details of a specific Field Productivity records by its identifier') and lists required parameters. It does not explicitly state when not to use it or mention alternatives, but the context is clear enough.

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