Show Gps Position

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

Annotations already indicate read-only, non-destructive, idempotent behavior. The description adds context about returning a JSON object, the Procore API endpoint, and the domain (Field Productivity). This goes beyond annotations without contradicting them.

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 four sentences, each serving a clear purpose: purpose, use case, return type, required params, and API reference. No extraneous content. Front-loaded with the most important information.

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?

No output schema exists, but the description states it returns a JSON object describing the record. It also provides the API endpoint and domain. It does not explain the pagination parameters (page, per_page) in the description, but they are documented in the schema. Overall sufficient for a show endpoint.

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 descriptions for all 4 parameters. The description only reiterates that 'id' and 'company_id' are required, adding no new meaning beyond the schema. 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 verb 'Return' or 'fetch' and the resource 'specific Gps Position' or 'Field Productivity records'. It explicitly distinguishes from the sibling `list_gps_positions` by emphasizing 'a specific' record identified by its ID.

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 explicitly mentions required parameters and the purpose of fetching full details. It implies this tool is for individual record retrieval, complementing the list tool. However, it lacks explicit guidance on when not to use it or alternative tools, though the sibling list tool provides context.

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