Bulk Create WBS Codes

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

While annotations already signal a non-read-only, idempotent, non-destructive operation, the description adds critical context: existing matching codes are updated, the modified WBS code is returned, and common failure statuses (401, 403, 404) are disclosed. This goes well beyond the structured 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 dense but well-organized, front-loading the core action and then covering behavior, usage, defaults, and errors. There is minor redundancy with the schema's required params listing, but no extraneous sentences.

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 2-parameter write operation with no output schema, the description covers all key aspects: return value, upsert behavior, project_id default, error payloads, and API endpoint. An agent would have sufficient information to confidently invoke this tool.

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% with descriptions for both params, so baseline is 3. The description adds meaningful context by referencing 'specified segments' as the input for bulk and clarifying that project_id can default to the value from procore_set_config, which is not apparent from the schema alone.

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 'Bulk Create WBS codes using the specified segments' and explains the upsert behavior, distinguishing it from single-record WBS creation tools in the sibling list. The verb and resource are specific, and the scope is well-defined.

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 advises 'Prefer this over repeated single-record calls when handling many WBS codes at once', providing a clear when-to-use directive. It also covers the project_id default behavior via procore_set_config, which helps the agent decide when the parameter can be omitted.

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