Skip to main content
Glama
TylerIlunga

Procore MCP Server

update_commitment_change_order

Modify commitment change orders in Procore to update contract details, status, dates, and attachments for construction project financials.

Instructions

Update Commitment Change Order. [Construction Financials/Commitments] PATCH /rest/v1.0/projects/{project_id}/commitment_change_orders/{id}

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
project_idYesUnique identifier for the project.
idYesID of the Commitment Change Order
run_configurable_validationsNoIf true, validations are run for the corresponding Configurable Field Set.
viewNoSpecifies Which view (which attributes) of the resource is going to be present in the response. the extended view includes change events data, while the default view does not.
contract_idNoUnique identifier for the contract.
batch_idNoUnique identifier for a change order batch.
change_order_change_reason_idNoUnique identifier for the change reason.
location_idNoUnique identifier for the location.
designated_reviewer_idNoUnique identifier for the designated reviewer. This field is only supported for single-tier projects. Behavior is undefined in multi-tier projects.
received_from_idNoUnique identifier for the received from entity.
descriptionNoDescription
due_dateNoDue Date
paid_dateNoPaid Date
invoiced_dateNoInvoiced Date
titleNoTitle of the Contract
statusNoStatus
referenceNoReference
numberNoNumber of the Change Order
revisionNoRevision Number
field_changeNoField Change
signature_requiredNoWhether a signature will be required for this Change Order
signed_change_order_received_dateNoSigned Change Order Received Date
schedule_impact_amountNoSchedule impact in days
executedNoWhether or not the Change Order is executed
privateNoWhether or not the Commitment Change Order is private
paidNoWhether or not the Commitment Change Order is paid
reasonNoReason for the change order
custom_field_%{custom_field_definition_id}NoValue of the custom field. The data type of the value passed in corresponds with the data_type of the Custom Field Definition. For a lov_entry data_type the value passed in should be the ID of one ...
enable_ssovNoWhether to enable SSOV on this Change Order. Only applicable to Commitment Change Orders.
change_event_attachment_idsNoList of attachment IDs to attach. These must presently be associated with Change Events.
attachment_idsNoExisting attachments to preserve on the response
drawing_revision_idsNoDrawing Revisions to attach to the response
Behavior2/5

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It states 'Update Commitment Change Order,' implying a mutation operation, but does not disclose any behavioral traits such as required permissions, side effects, validation rules, or error conditions. The PATCH endpoint hint suggests partial updates, but this is not explicitly explained. The description lacks critical context for safe and effective use.

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

Conciseness3/5

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

The description is concise with a single sentence, but it is not front-loaded with actionable information. It mixes a tautological statement with technical details (category and endpoint) that may not be immediately helpful to an agent. While brief, it lacks effective structure to guide understanding, making it adequate but not efficient.

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

Completeness2/5

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

Given the complexity of a 32-parameter mutation tool with no annotations and no output schema, the description is insufficient. It does not explain the resource being updated, the expected behavior, or the response format. For a tool with such a rich schema and significant impact, the description fails to provide the necessary context for an agent to use it correctly and safely.

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

Parameters3/5

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

The input schema has 100% description coverage, providing clear documentation for all 32 parameters. The description adds no parameter-specific information beyond the schema. According to the rules, with high schema coverage (>80%), the baseline score is 3, as the schema does the heavy lifting and the description does not compensate or add further meaning.

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

Purpose2/5

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

The description 'Update Commitment Change Order' is a tautology that restates the tool name without adding clarity. It includes a category '[Construction Financials/Commitments]' and a technical endpoint 'PATCH /rest/v1.0/projects/{project_id}/commitment_change_orders/{id}', but these do not explain what the tool actually does in plain terms. The purpose remains vague, failing to specify what 'update' entails or what a 'Commitment Change Order' is.

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

Usage Guidelines1/5

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

The description provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It does not mention any prerequisites, context, or sibling tools (e.g., 'create_commitment_change_order' or 'delete_commitment_change_order' from the list). Without such information, an agent cannot make informed decisions about tool selection.

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