Recycles A Material.

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

While the description adds useful behavioral details (error codes 401/403/404, restore-by-admin possibility, default config), the sentence 'Permanently removes the recycles a material. This cannot be undone' contradicts the earlier 'soft delete... can be restored' statement. This makes the actual behavior ambiguous and misleading, overshadowing the added context.

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 contains a garbled, contradictory sentence ('Permanently removes the recycles a material') plus redundant instructions to confirm and resolve the id. The extra words do not add value and actively harm clarity.

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 error cases, defaults, and restore possibility, but the conflicting permanent-delete sentence leaves the operation's true effect unclear. The tool has no output schema, so success behavior is not described, but the internal contradiction is the primary 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?

The input schema already describes all 3 parameters, but the description adds meaning by explaining that company_id and project_id default to procore_set_config values when omitted, and that id must identify an existing parent record resolved via the matching list tool. This goes beyond the schema's basic path descriptions.

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 'Performs a soft delete (recycle) of the material,' which is a specific verb+resource and distinguishes it from hard delete. However, the later sentence 'Permanently removes the recycles a material. This cannot be undone' directly contradicts the soft-delete/restorable framing, blurring the core purpose.

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 gives clear operational guidance: confirm the target id with the matching show or list tool, resolve parent records first, and notes that company_id/project_id default to procore_set_config values. It does not explicitly contrast with alternative delete/restore tools like restore_materials_in_bulk, but the context is sufficient.

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