Show Commitment Contract Summary

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint and idempotentHint. The description adds behavioral details: 'Returns a paginated JSON array of Commitments. Use page and per_page to control pagination; the response includes pagination metadata.' This provides useful information beyond annotations. No contradiction 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 5 sentences, front-loading the purpose and usage. It is clear and efficient, though it includes API endpoint details which are not strictly necessary. Still, it is concise and well-structured.

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?

No output schema exists, but the description explains the return format: 'Returns a paginated JSON array of Commitments.' It also provides the API version and endpoint. For a tool of moderate complexity, this is sufficient for an agent to understand and 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 description coverage is 100%, so baseline is 3. The description lists required parameters and mentions pagination parameters, but does not add significant meaning beyond what the schema already provides. It confirms the role of each parameter as URL path parameters.

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 'Returns a combined summary of change order and invoicing information for a specific commitment contract (Purchase Order or Work Order).' It specifies the verb 'Returns', the resource 'commitment contract summary', and distinguishes from sibling 'show_commitment_contract' which likely returns only the contract without the summary.

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 says 'Use this to fetch the full details of a specific Commitments by its identifier.' This provides clear purpose and context. It does not explicitly state when not to use it or mention alternatives, but the context is sufficient for an agent to decide.

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