Update A Change Order Change Reason

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

The description states the tool updates and returns the modified object, but annotations already indicate it is not read-only, not destructive, and not idempotent. The description adds endpoint details and parameter requirements but does not disclose additional behavioral traits beyond what annotations provide.

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 concise (4 sentences), front-loaded with the core purpose, and includes necessary metadata (API version, endpoint). Every sentence adds value without redundancy.

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?

For a simple update tool with 4 parameters (2 required) and no output schema, the description adequately explains the update semantics and return value. It is complete enough for an agent to invoke correctly, though additional info about error states could 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?

The input schema has 100% coverage, but the description adds value by explicitly stating required parameters (company_id, id) and explaining the partial update concept ('only the supplied fields are changed'). It also provides Procore API context that situates the parameters.

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 identifies the verb (Update), resource (a Specific Change Order Change Reason), and scope (for a Company). It distinguishes from sibling tools like create and delete by specifying 'update an existing' and noting that only supplied fields are changed.

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 provides clear guidance on when to use this tool (to update an existing change order change reason) and mentions the partial update behavior. It does not explicitly state when not to use or name alternatives, but the sibling context (create/delete) is implicitly differentiating.

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