Show Company Inspection Template Item

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

Annotations already provide readOnlyHint=true, destructiveHint=false, idempotentHint=true. Description adds that it returns a JSON object and uses GET, which is consistent but does not disclose additional behavioral traits (e.g., response structure, rate limits). 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?

Three sentences with purpose, usage, and output type. Front-loaded with primary action. Includes API endpoint details which may be unnecessary for an agent but not overly verbose. Could remove the API line without loss of clarity.

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?

Covers basic purpose and required parameters. However, the presence of optional page/per_page parameters is unexplained, which is unusual for a 'show' tool. Description does not clarify what pagination applies to. Also, no differentiation from sibling tools for references or evidence configurations.

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% coverage with descriptions for all parameters. Description lists required parameters but adds no extra meaning beyond schema. The pagination parameters page/per_page are present but not explained in the description (why a show endpoint has pagination is ambiguous).

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?

Description clearly states it returns details of a Company Inspection Template Item. The verb 'Returns' and resource are specific. However, it refers to 'specific Inspections' which is a minor typo/confusion (should be 'Inspection Template Item'). It does not differentiate from siblings like show_company_inspection_template_item_reference or list_company_inspection_template_items.

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?

Tells when to use (to fetch full details by identifier) and lists required parameters. Does not mention when NOT to use, nor does it guide the agent away from alternative tools (e.g., listing vs showing). No exclusions or context for optional pagination parameters.

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