Create Purchase Order Contract

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

Annotations already mark readOnlyHint=false and idempotentHint=false, but the description adds valuable context: non-idempotency ('calling it again creates another record'), success response format (HTTP 201 with new id), and error payload patterns (401, 403, 404). This goes beyond the structured annotations without contradicting them.

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 compact and front-loaded, but it repeats 'Creates' in the first two sentences. The inclusion of endpoint and API reference is useful, though the redundancy is a minor flaw.

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?

It covers the essential aspects: purpose, success response, error handling, required parameters, and endpoint. Without an output schema, the description's mention of the returned id is helpful. It does not detail the purchase_order_contract object structure, but the schema leaves it open-ended, so this is not a major gap.

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 the baseline is 3. The description only reiterates required parameters (project_id, purchase_order_contract) without adding new semantic meaning. The schema already provides per-parameter descriptions, so no additional value here.

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 opens with 'Creates a new purchase order contract in Procore', a specific verb+resource statement. It further distinguishes from sibling tools like list/show/update/delete by noting 'returns it with its new id (HTTP 201)' and that calling again creates another record, clearly marking it as a create operation.

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?

While it doesn't explicitly name alternatives, the description gives clear context: it's for creating a new record, with required parameters and a warning about duplicate creation. It lacks explicit 'when not to use' guidance, so it falls short of a 5.

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