Show Timesheet Location Filters

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

Annotations indicate a read-only, idempotent operation. The description mentions pagination and the endpoint, but the conflicting statements between listing filters and fetching records undermines transparency. There is no contradiction with annotations, but the description is inconsistent about what the tool actually does.

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 verbose and contains contradictory information. It includes API reference details (Procore API, endpoint) that could be trimmed. The first sentence is clear, but the second sentence introduces confusion. Every sentence does not earn its place.

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?

There is no output schema, so the description must explain what the response contains. It only mentions 'pagination metadata' and 'Field Productivity records' (which is likely incorrect). For a filter tool, the response structure (e.g., list of filter options) is not described, leaving the agent without enough context to use the tool effectively.

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%. The description adds context for page and per_page (controlling pagination) and notes that company_id is required, though this is already in the schema. It does not explain the response structure beyond pagination metadata, so it adds moderate value.

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 states 'Show timesheet location filters' but also says 'fetch the full details of a specific Field Productivity records by its identifier' and 'Returns a paginated JSON array of Field Productivity records.' This is contradictory and unclear. The tool name suggests listing filter options, but the description implies fetching specific records. The purpose is muddled.

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 does not provide guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives (e.g., other show_timesheet_*_filters tools). It only notes that company_id is required and mentions pagination parameters, but no when-to-use or when-not-to-use context.

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