Skip to main content
Glama
TylerIlunga

Procore MCP Server

Update Billing Period

update_billing_period

Update a commitment's billing period by specifying project ID, period ID, due date, start/end dates, and status. Modifies only the supplied fields.

Instructions

Update a specified Billing Period. Use this to update an existing Commitments (only the supplied fields are changed). Updates the specified Commitments and returns the modified object on success. Required parameters: project_id, id, due_date, start_date, end_date, status. Procore API: Construction Financials > Commitments. Endpoint: PATCH /rest/v1.0/projects/{project_id}/billing_periods/{id}

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
project_idYesURL path parameter — unique identifier for the project.
idYesURL path parameter — unique identifier of the Commitments resource
due_dateYesJSON request body field — due date in YYYY-MM-DD format
start_dateYesJSON request body field — the start date in YYYY-MM-DD format
end_dateYesJSON request body field — the end date in YYYY-MM-DD format
statusYesJSON request body field — the status for this Commitments operation
Behavior3/5

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

Annotations indicate a mutating, non-idempotent operation with side effects. The description adds that only supplied fields are changed and returns the object, but does not clarify side effects or permissions.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness4/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

The description is three sentences, front-loading purpose and usage. Minor redundancy exists between the first two sentences.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness3/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

Covers return value and API endpoint, but lacks clarification on the partial update contradiction and does not address side effects implied by openWorldHint.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters2/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

While schema coverage is 100%, the description claims 'only the supplied fields are changed' which contradicts the required parameters in the schema. This misleads about partial update capability.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose4/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description clearly states the tool updates a specified Billing Period and returns the modified object. It identifies the resource and action, but does not differentiate from sibling tools like create or delete.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines3/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

The description suggests using for updating existing commitments with partial updates, but does not explicitly exclude creation or provide alternatives like listing IDs first.

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

Install Server

Other Tools

Latest Blog Posts

MCP directory API

We provide all the information about MCP servers via our MCP API.

curl -X GET 'https://glama.ai/api/mcp/v1/servers/TylerIlunga/procore-mcp-server'

If you have feedback or need assistance with the MCP directory API, please join our Discord server