Show Budget Line Item

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

Beyond the readOnlyHint annotation, the description adds 'Read-only — it changes nothing in Procore,' details error responses ('401 when the token has expired, 403 without tool permission, and 404 when an id does not resolve'), and specifies the return type ('a single JSON object'). This is valuable context not present in 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 a compact set of five sentences, each earning its place: purpose, usage, parameter prerequisite, return type, read-only note, error codes, and endpoint. No redundant or filler content.

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 no output schema, the description covers return format, error handling, required parameters, id resolution prerequisite, read-only nature, and API endpoint. This gives an agent everything needed to invoke correctly.

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 already documents both params (100% coverage), so baseline is 3. The description adds the requirement that 'id must identify an existing parent record' and advises resolving it with the list tool first. However, the phrase 'parent record' is slightly ambiguous since the endpoint is for line items themselves, so it doesn't fully disambiguate the id semantics.

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 opens with 'Return information about a Budget Line Item' — a specific verb and resource. It further clarifies the use case: 'Use this when you already know which budget line item you want and need its full field set,' which distinguishes it from list/search tools.

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?

Explicit guidance is provided: 'Use this when you already know which budget line item you want' and 'resolve it with the matching list tool first' establishes both when to use and a required prerequisite. The parameter requirements are also stated.

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