Show Recycled Witness Statement

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

It states 'Read-only — it changes nothing in Procore,' consistent with the readOnlyHint annotation, and adds practical error semantics (401, 403, 404) and the project_id default behavior. This goes beyond what annotations provide, though it doesn't describe the returned object's structure.

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 somewhat long but well-structured, front-loading purpose and usage. Most sentences add value, but 'Required parameters: project_id, id' is redundant with the schema, making it slightly less crisp than ideal.

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?

It covers purpose, usage, parameter resolution, error handling, and the API endpoint. Missing details about the returned object's fields and the optional incident_id parameter, but given the annotations and absence of an output schema, it is reasonably complete.

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 meaning by explaining that project_id defaults to procore_set_config and that id must identify an existing parent record resolvable via the list tool. However, it does not explain the optional incident_id parameter, so it doesn't fully compensate.

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 it 'Returns a specific Recycled Witness Statement' and mentions the 'full field set' for an already-known record. However, it does not differentiate from sibling tools like 'retrieve_recycled_witness_statement' or 'show_witness_statement', which could confuse an agent.

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 gives explicit context: 'Use this when you already know which recycled witness statement you want and need its full field set' and instructs to 'resolve it with the matching list tool first.' This implies when not to use it but doesn't name alternative tools for non-recycled statements, so it lacks explicit exclusions.

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