cor_get_project_profitability

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

No annotations provided; description only states 'Get profitability data' with no disclosure of permissions, side effects, or scope of data. Fails to confirm it is a safe read operation.

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?

Short and to the point, but overly terse. The first line is clear, but the parameter section is minimal. Every line earns its place, but omits critical details.

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?

Despite having an output schema, the description fails to explain what 'profitability data' encompasses (e.g., costs, revenues, margins). Lacks context on how to interpret results or when this tool is appropriate.

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%, yet the description merely restates the parameter name with 'The project ID'—no additional explanation of type, format, or constraints (e.g., when to use integer vs string). Adds almost no value over the schema.

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?

Clearly states the verb 'Get' and the resource 'profitability data for a project'. Distinguishes from sibling tools like cor_get_project and cor_get_project_costs by specifying profitability focus.

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?

No guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. Lacks context about prerequisites, expected use cases, or selection criteria among similar tools.

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