Update Project Checklist Template

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

Annotations show readOnlyHint=false, destructiveHint=false, idempotentHint=false. The description adds that only supplied fields are changed and that it returns the modified object, which provides some behavioral context. However, it doesn't disclose additional traits like auth requirements, rate limits, or side effects beyond what annotations imply.

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 concise with a clear front-loaded purpose statement. It covers what the tool does, usage context, required parameters, and API details in a few sentences without redundancy.

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?

Given the complexity (4 params, no output schema, nested objects), the description adequately covers partial update behavior and returns the modified object. It includes the API path for reference. However, without an output schema, more detail on response fields would enhance completeness.

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 reiterates required parameters and includes the API endpoint and Procore section. It mentions multipart/form-data for attachments, which is also in the schema. Beyond that, it adds minimal new meaning, so baseline 3 is appropriate.

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 updates an Inspection Checklist Template, specifying it modifies only supplied fields and returns the modified object. The verb 'Updates' and resource 'Inspection Checklist Template' are specific, distinguishing it from sibling tools like create or delete.

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 tells when to use: 'Use this to update an existing Inspections (only the supplied fields are changed)' and lists required parameters. It does not explicitly contrast with create/delete siblings, but the context is clear. Lacks explicit when-not-to-use or alternative tool names.

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