Create A Batch Of BIM Levels

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

Annotations already indicate it is not read-only and not destructive, so the description adds limited behavioral context. It mentions returning the created object on success (HTTP 201), which is consistent. No additional details about potential side effects, partial failures, or authorization needs are provided, but annotations cover the basics.

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 four sentences covering purpose, usage, return value, and required parameters/API info. Each sentence adds value, and it is well-structured. No fluff.

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 batch create tool with no output schema, the description provides sufficient context: it states the endpoint, required params, and expected result. However, it does not explain the bim_levels payload format or error handling. Given the tool's complexity and the richness of sibling tools, it could be more complete, but it is adequate.

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%, so the description adds minimal value beyond the schema. It restates required parameters (project_id, bim_levels) but does not clarify the structure of bim_levels array items or provide constraints beyond what the schema already defines. The 'view' parameter is mentioned in schema but not in description.

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 it creates a batch of BIM Levels, with a specific verb and resource. It distinguishes from the sibling tool 'create_bim_level' (singular) by specifying batch creation. The mention of the endpoint and HTTP status further clarifies the action.

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 says 'Use this to create a new BIM records in Procore,' which implies the context. However, it does not explicitly state when not to use it or compare to alternatives like 'create_bim_level' for single creation. The required parameters are listed, but no guidance on prerequisites or constraints.

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