Show BIM Model Revision Plan

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and destructiveHint=false, so the safety profile is clear. The description adds that it returns a JSON object with full details, but does not elaborate on behavioral traits like pagination or response structure beyond the baseline.

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 four sentences, front-loaded with purpose and usage. It is concise and includes essential information without redundancy.

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 the tool's simplicity (single item fetch, good annotations, full schema coverage), the description adequately covers purpose, usage, and required parameters. It does not explain optional parameters like 'view', 'page', 'per_page' but these are documented in the schema. A minor gap is the lack of clarification on pagination parameters for a single-item endpoint.

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 documents all parameters. The description adds value by mentioning required parameters (id, project_id) and noting that id is a URL path parameter, but does not compensate for the low coverage gap since it's already covered.

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 'Return a single BIM Model Revision Plan item' with a specific verb and resource. It distinguishes from sibling tools like 'list_bim_model_revision_plans' 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 indicates when to use this tool ('fetch the full details of a specific BIM records by its identifier') and lists required parameters. However, it does not explicitly exclude alternatives or provide when-not-to-use guidance.

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