hcp_list_job_line_items

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

Annotations already cover readOnly, idempotent, and non-destructive behavior. The description adds useful behavioral detail beyond that by disclosing price conversion from cents to dollars and explaining that the native HCP response shape is normalized. This helps the agent understand the actual output transformation.

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 two sentences with no filler. The core action is front-loaded, and the note about unit conversion and response normalization earns its place by providing operationally relevant detail.

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?

The tool has one required parameter, annotations declare safety, and an output schema exists, so return-value details are already handled. The description covers what the tool does, the key unit transformation, and the normalization behavior, leaving no significant gap for an agent to call it correctly.

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 description coverage is 0%, so the description must compensate for the lack of parameter documentation. It only says 'for a job,' which gives broad context but does not explain the job_id parameter's format, source, or expectations beyond the name itself. Minimal additional meaning is provided.

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 the specific verb 'List' and identifies the exact resource: 'line items for a job.' This clearly distinguishes it from siblings like hcp_get_job, hcp_list_job_invoices, and hcp_list_estimate_line_items, which target different resources.

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 implies the tool is used when line items for a specific job are needed, and the sibling list hcp_list_estimate_line_items suggests an alternative. However, it does not explicitly state when to prefer this tool over alternatives or when not to use it.

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