Create Work Order Contract Detail Line Item

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

Annotations already indicate a non-read-only, non-destructive, non-idempotent operation. The description adds that it returns the created object on success (HTTP 201), but this is standard for create operations. No additional behavioral details such as side effects or authorization requirements are provided.

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 front-loaded with the primary purpose. However, it contains redundancy (e.g., mentioning 'Commitments' twice) and lists required parameters that are already in the schema. Could be slightly more concise.

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?

The description explains the operation and provides the endpoint, but it does not describe the structure of the contract_detail_line_item object (schema allows arbitrary properties), error handling, or prerequisites. Given no output schema, additional context would be beneficial.

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 coverage is 100% with each parameter already described. The description merely lists the required parameters without adding new semantic information. Baseline 3 is appropriate as the schema does the heavy lifting.

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 'Creates a Detail Line Item on a given Work Order Contract Line Item', specifying verb, resource, and object type. It differentiates from sibling tools by emphasizing 'Detail Line Item' as opposed to general line items and provides the specific endpoint.

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 indicates 'Use this to create a new Commitments in Procore' but lacks explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like create_work_order_contract_line_item. Context is implied through naming and endpoint but no exclusion criteria are given.

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