Show Observation Item

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint and idempotentHint, but the description reinforces this with 'Read-only — it changes nothing in Procore' and adds valuable info about error payloads with specific HTTP status codes. This goes beyond annotations by explaining what happens on failures and the download token behavior.

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 moderately sized but every sentence adds value: purpose, contents, usage guidance, id resolution, error semantics, and endpoint info are all included. It is front-loaded with the primary function and return details, though slightly long, it earns its length.

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 simple GET endpoint with two parameters and no output schema, the description is thorough. It covers return payload contents, usage context, id resolution, read-only safety, failure modes, and even the download token. No significant gaps remain.

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% for both parameters, so baseline is 3. The description adds meaning by explaining that 'id must identify an existing parent record' and instructing to resolve it via the list tool, which helps with parameter usage beyond the schema's basic descriptions.

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 a single Observation Item with full detail payload, listing specific components like attachments and custom field values. It distinguishes from sibling tools like list_observation_items by noting this is for when you already know which item you want and need its full field set.

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 observation item you want and need its full field set') and provides guidance to resolve the id with the matching list tool first. Also mentions common failure modes (401, 403, 404), giving clear operational context.

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