Show Project Vendor Insurance

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

Annotations already indicate read-only, non-destructive, idempotent, and open world. The description adds that it returns a JSON object and mentions the API endpoint, which provides minimal extra behavioral context beyond annotations.

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, each serving a clear purpose: stating what it does, when to use it, and listing required parameters and API info. It is efficient with no wasted words.

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?

The description does not address optional parameters like page, per_page, or view, which might be surprising for a 'show' tool. It also does not explain pagination or the extended view, leaving gaps in understanding the full behavior.

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%, so the baseline is 3. The description lists required parameters but repeats what schema already marks as required and does not explain the meaning of each parameter 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 clearly states the tool shows details on Project Vendor Insurance and fetches full details of specific Directory records. It is specific but does not explicitly differentiate from similar tools like show_company_vendor_insurance, relying on the name and context.

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 only says to use it to fetch details by identifier. It provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives, nor any exclusions or conditions for use.

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