Show Project WBS Segment

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

Beyond the readOnlyHint=true annotation, the description adds substantial context: it states 'Read-only — it changes nothing in Procore,' confirms the return type as 'a single JSON object,' and details failure modes with specific HTTP statuses (401, 403, 404). This goes well beyond the 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?

Each sentence serves a distinct purpose: purpose, when-to-use, defaults, return type, safety, errors, required params, and API reference. No fluff; the most critical information is 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?

Despite having no output schema, the description covers return shape, error behavior, parameter defaults, prerequisites, and API endpoint. For a simple read-only resource tool with 3 parameters, this is comprehensive.

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 adds meaningful extra context: project_id defaults to the procore_set_config value, and id 'must identify an existing parent record — resolve it with the matching list tool first.' These details enrich the parameter semantics 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 'Retrieves a single project WBS segment in the specified Procore project,' which is a specific verb+resource+scope. It further distinguishes from siblings by specifying 'single... in the specified Procore project,' contrasting with list tools and company-scoped tools.

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?

It explicitly says 'Use this when you already know which project WBS segment you want and need its full field set,' providing clear context. It also advises 'resolve it with the matching list tool first,' indicating a prerequisite workflow. It does not explicitly exclude company-scoped alternatives, but the project scope is implicit.

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