Show Company Checklist Section

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

Annotations already provide readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true, and destructiveHint=false, covering safety and idempotency. The description adds that it returns a JSON object and mentions the endpoint, but does not elaborate on behaviors like pagination or error handling. 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?

Description is four sentences and includes useful context like Procore API area and endpoint URL. It front-loads the purpose. Slightly wordy with the phrase 'Inspections' used inconsistently, but overall efficient.

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 presence of annotations (readOnly, idempotent) and full schema coverage, the description adequately covers the tool's purpose, required parameters, and return format. It could be more explicit about the output structure, but the statement 'Returns a JSON object describing the requested Inspections' provides sufficient context for a simple read operation.

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?

Input schema has 100% description coverage for all 4 parameters. The description only reiterates the two required parameters (company_id, id) without adding extra meaning or clarifying defaults like page=1. Baseline score of 3 is appropriate when schema fully documents 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 it returns details for a specific Company Checklist Section using its identifier. It distinguishes from sibling list tools by specifying 'fetch the full details of a specific Inspections' and noting required id parameter, making the purpose unambiguous.

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 Inspections by its identifier', implying when to use it. However, it does not explicitly state when not to use it or mention alternatives like list endpoints. The guidance is present but minimal.

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