Show Task Item

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

In addition to annotations (readOnlyHint, destructiveHint false), the description explicitly states 'Read-only — it changes nothing in Procore' and details failure modes with HTTP status codes (401, 403, 404). It also discloses return format as a single JSON object, providing 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 information-dense without fluff: it front-loads purpose, then usage, return format, read-only nature, error behavior, and API endpoint. Every sentence contributes, making it appropriately sized for a show tool.

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 single-resource show operation with no output schema, the description is complete: it specifies the return object, error payload characteristics, required parameters, and Procore API endpoint. The view parameter's behavior is already documented in the schema, so nothing essential is missing.

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?

The input schema covers 100% of parameters with descriptions, so the baseline is 3. The description adds value for 'id' by explaining it must reference an existing record and should be resolved via a list tool first, which is not in the schema. The 'Required parameters' line is redundant but harmless.

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 uses a specific verb ('Show') and resource ('task item'), and clarifies it returns a single JSON object with the full field set, distinguishing it from list or create tools. It clearly identifies the tool's scope as a 'show existing single record' operation.

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 states when to use: 'when you already know which task item you want and need its full field set' and gives a prerequisite: resolve the id with the matching list tool first. This guides appropriate usage without ambiguity.

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