Show Custom Field Definition

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

Annotations already declare the read-only, idempotent, non-destructive nature. The description adds valuable context on error responses (401/403/404 meanings) and the config-based default for company_id. It also confirms the return shape as a single JSON object, exceeding the annotation baseline.

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 multi-sentence but every clause carries useful information: purpose, usage, defaults, return format, error semantics, required params, API location. Information is front-loaded and goes from general to specific. No fluff.

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?

With no output schema, the description compensates by stating the return type, API endpoint, and associated error codes. It also includes required parameters and the Procore admin tool path. The tool's complexity is moderate, and this description covers the essential operational context.

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 covers all four parameters, so the baseline is 3. The description provides extra meaning for company_id (defaults from procore_set_config) and id (must reference an existing parent record, resolve via list). This additional guidance enhances usability 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 opens with a clear action: 'Returns the details for a specified Custom Field Definition.' It further specifies when to use it (when you already know the definition and need its full field set), distinguishing it from list operations. The resource and behavior are 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?

Explicitly states usage context: 'Use this when you already know which custom field definition you want' and directs the agent to resolve id via the matching list tool first. It also clarifies company_id default behavior from procore_set_config. While it doesn't name alternative tools, the instruction is clear enough.

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