Delete Procore Item Association

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

The description contradicts the actual behavior by claiming it deletes Coordination Issues instead of associations. It only repeats 'cannot be undone' which is already implied by destructiveHint. No additional behavioral details like side effects on associated data.

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 repetitive, stating 'This cannot be undone' twice and 'Permanently removes the specified Coordination Issues' twice. It could be more concise and front-loaded with the correct purpose.

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?

With no output schema and destructive nature, the description should clarify what persists after deletion (e.g., Coordination Issue and Procore item remain, only link is removed). It omits this and also does not explain the single enum value for item_type. Insufficient for a 4-parameter, destructive tool.

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 baseline is 3. The description lists required parameters but adds no meaning beyond what the schema already provides. No extra context for parameters like valid values (e.g., item_type only accepts 'rfi').

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 states 'Delete the association between Coordination Issue and Procore item' but then inconsistently says 'permanently delete the specified Coordination Issues', which is misleading. The tool actually deletes the association, not the issues themselves. This confusion reduces 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 on when to use this tool versus alternatives like bulk_delete_procore_item_associations or delete_viewpoint_and_procore_item_association. The description does not provide any usage context or exclusions.

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