Show Project Action Plan Template Reference

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, destructiveHint, idempotentHint, and openWorldHint, so the description does not need to repeat them. It adds the return type (JSON object) and endpoint info, but no additional behavioral traits like pagination behavior or rate limits.

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, directly stating the purpose, usage, return type, required parameters, and API endpoint. No unnecessary words, well front-loaded.

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 show endpoint with 4 parameters (2 required) and no output schema, the description covers the main purpose, required parameters, and return type. However, it does not clarify the presence of optional page/per_page parameters, which seem out of place for a get-by-id call.

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 four parameters. The description merely repeats the required parameters without adding new meaning or context beyond what the schema already provides.

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 'View' and the specific resource 'Project Action Plan Template Reference', and distinguishes it from many other 'show' sibling tools by specifying the exact entity and scope.

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 'Use this to fetch the full details of a specific Action Plans by its identifier,' providing clear context for when to use it. However, it does not explicitly state when not to use it or mention alternatives like listing endpoints.

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