Show Equipment Maintenance Log

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, destructiveHint=false, idempotentHint=true, so the behavioral safety profile is clear. The description adds that it returns a JSON object, which aligns with annotations. No contradictions, but adds minimal new context.

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 three sentences long and front-loaded with the core purpose. It is efficient but could be more precise by avoiding the slightly confusing 'Field Productivity records' phrase.

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 low complexity, no output schema, and comprehensive annotations, the description provides adequate context. It explains the API endpoint and required parameters, though it does not mention optional pagination parameters (page, per_page) in the description.

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 four parameters. The description reiterates required parameters (id, company_id) but does not add meaning beyond the schema, so a baseline 3 is appropriate.

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 tool returns detailed information about a specific equipment Maintenance Log using verbs like 'Return' and 'fetch'. It distinguishes itself from sibling list and create/update/delete tools by focusing on a single record by identifier.

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 to use it to fetch details of a specific log by identifier, but it does not explicitly state when not to use it or mention alternatives like list_equipment_maintenance_logs for multiple records. The context is clear but lacks exclusions.

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