Show Company Configuration

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, destructiveHint=false, idempotentHint=true, and openWorldHint=true, indicating a safe, idempotent read operation. The description adds that the response is a paginated JSON array with metadata, which is useful but beyond the annotations' scope.

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 concise (three sentences) and front-loaded with the purpose. Every sentence adds value, including pagination details, required parameters, and the API endpoint.

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 has 3 parameters with full schema descriptions, annotations, and no output schema, the description sufficiently covers the return type (JSON array) and pagination metadata. It is nearly complete for its complexity.

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% with each parameter described. The description reiterates that company_id is required and page/per_page control pagination, but adds no new meaning 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 verb 'fetch' and resource 'Company Configuration', and specifies that it retrieves full details by identifier. It distinguishes itself from numerous sibling tools by focusing on company-level settings.

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 explains pagination control with page/per_page and notes that company_id is required. It provides the Procore API endpoint for context. However, it lacks explicit guidance on when not to use this tool or alternatives.

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