Create Prime Contract Line Item

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

Annotations indicate mutability (readOnlyHint=false) and non-destructiveness. The description adds a side effect: automatic creation of a budget line item under certain conditions. It also states the HTTP 201 response. However, it does not disclose permissions, validation rules, or failure modes, leaving gaps.

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 verbose and repetitive, with phrases like 'Use this to create a new Prime Contracts in Procore. Creates a new Prime Contracts' that waste space. Key information is not front-loaded; the actionable directive is buried among redundant statements.

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 the tool's complexity (3 params, nested objects, no output schema), the description lacks crucial details about the response object structure, error handling, and multiple scenarios. It mentions the return of the created object but does not elaborate.

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?

Input schema has 100% description coverage, so the baseline is 3. The description restates required parameters but adds no additional semantic detail beyond the schema. The line_item parameter remains vague ('the Line Item object') with no structure specified.

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 the tool creates a new line item for a prime contract, using the verb 'Create' and the resource 'Line Item for the Prime Contract'. It mentions the endpoint and required parameters, providing a specific purpose. However, there is some confusing repetition (e.g., 'Create a new Prime Contracts') that slightly detracts from clarity.

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 is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives. The description does not mention when not to use it, prerequisites, or compare it to sibling tools like create_commitment_contract_line_item. The required parameters list is not usage guidance.

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