Show Company Vendor Insurance

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

Discloses read-only nature ('Read-only — it changes nothing in Procore'), which aligns with annotations, but adds unique value: company_id defaults to procore_set_config, returns a single JSON object, and failure modes with HTTP status codes (401, 403, 404). This goes beyond annotation details.

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 compact at about 120 words yet packs purpose, usage, defaults, errors, and API endpoint. It is front-loaded with the main action, and every sentence contributes essential operational knowledge without redundancy.

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?

For a show tool with no output schema, the description covers purpose, when to use, parameter resolution, read-only behavior, error responses, and endpoint location (Core > Directory). This is sufficient for an agent to select and invoke the tool 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 coverage is 100% with basic identifier descriptions, so baseline is 3. The description adds meaningful semantics: 'vendor_id, id must identify existing parent records — resolve them with the matching list tool first' and 'company_id defaults to the value set by procore_set_config when omitted,' which are not in 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 opens with 'Show detail on the specified Company Vendor Insurance' — a specific verb and resource. It further distinguishes from siblings by stating 'Use this when you already know which company vendor insurance you want and need its full field set,' which separates it from listing or mutation 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?

Explicitly states when to use ('when you already know which company vendor insurance you want') and provides an alternative: 'resolve them with the matching list tool first.' Also mentions the company_id default behavior from procore_set_config, giving clear context.

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