Show BIM Model

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

Annotations already indicate readOnlyHint=true and destructiveHint=false, so the description's mention of 'Return' is consistent. The description adds useful context beyond annotations by specifying the API endpoint (GET /rest/v1.0/bim_models/{id}) and required parameters, which helps the agent understand the exact behavior. 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: two functional sentences plus API details. It is front-loaded with the core purpose. While it could be slightly tighter (e.g., 'BIM records' is mentioned twice), it is efficient and not bloated.

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?

The tool has no output schema, so the description should explain return values. It says 'Returns a JSON object describing the requested BIM records,' which is vague. For a retrieval tool, more detail about the structure or fields would be beneficial, but given the complexity of BIM records, this might suffice. Sibling context is not utilized.

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 description coverage is 100%, so baseline is 3. The description reiterates 'Required parameters: id, project_id' but adds no meaning beyond what the schema already provides (each parameter has a description). No additional semantic value beyond the schema.

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's purpose as 'Return a single BIM Model item' and 'fetch the full details of a specific BIM records by its identifier.' It uses a specific verb (return/fetch) and resource (BIM Model), and distinguishes from list/bulk BIM tools by specifying 'single' item retrieval.

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 implies when to use the tool ('Use this to fetch the full details of a specific BIM records by its identifier') but does not explicitly state when not to use it or provide alternatives. It mentions required parameters, which helps context, but lacks explicit exclusions or comparisons to sibling tools.

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