Create Manpower Log

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

Annotations already indicate readOnlyHint:false (write operation) and destructiveHint:false. The description adds minor behavioral details (returns created object on HTTP 201) and endpoint info, but does not go beyond what annotations or schema imply. No contradictions.

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 moderately concise but contains redundancy (e.g., 'Creates single Manpower Log' followed by 'Use this to create a new Daily Log records' and then 'Creates a new Daily Log records' again). It could be streamlined. The structure is front-loaded with the main action.

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 4 parameters (with full schema descriptions), no output schema, and a link to an external guide, the description is fairly complete. It covers the core action, required parameters, HTTP response, and endpoint. It does not explain the manpower_log object structure (open-ended schema), but the guide may compensate.

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 100%, so baseline is 3. The description lists required parameters (project_id, manpower_log) but adds no new semantic meaning beyond the schema. The link for attachments/locations provides external context, but no additional parameter-level insight.

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 single Manpower Log using a specific verb ('Creates') and resource ('Manpower Log'). It is distinct from siblings by name, but does not explicitly differentiate from other Daily Log creation tools (e.g., create_visitor_log). The 'Daily Log' context is mentioned, but not the unique resource name.

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 Daily Log records in Procore,' which gives basic usage but provides no guidance on when NOT to use this tool or what alternatives exist (e.g., other log creation tools). The link to a guide offers some context but no explicit decision criteria.

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