Skip to main content
Glama
TylerIlunga

Procore MCP Server

Update Commitment Change Order Batch

update_commitment_change_order_batch

Update an existing commitment change order batch by modifying its fields such as status, title, due date, or attached change orders. Returns the updated object on success.

Instructions

Update the specified Commitment Change Order Batch. 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. Procore API: Construction Financials > Commitments. Endpoint: PATCH /rest/v1.0/projects/{project_id}/commitment_change_order_batches/{id}

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
project_idYesURL path parameter — unique identifier for the project.
idYesURL path parameter — iD of the Commitment Change Order Batch
run_configurable_validationsNoQuery string parameter — if true, validations are run for the corresponding Configurable Field Set.
contract_idNoJSON request body field — unique identifier for the contract.
descriptionNoJSON request body field — the description for this Commitments operation
due_dateNoJSON request body field — due date in YYYY-MM-DD format
executedNoJSON request body field — whether or not the Change Order Batch is executed
invoiced_dateNoJSON request body field — the invoiced date in YYYY-MM-DD format
numberNoJSON request body field — number of the Change Order Batch
paid_dateNoJSON request body field — the paid date in YYYY-MM-DD format
privateNoJSON request body field — whether or not the Change Order Batch is private
revised_substantial_completion_dateNoJSON request body field — revised substantial completion date
revisionNoJSON request body field — revision Number
schedule_impact_amountNoJSON request body field — schedule impact in days
signature_requiredNoJSON request body field — whether a signature will be required for this Change Order Batch
signed_change_order_received_dateNoJSON request body field — signed Change Order Batch Received Date
statusNoJSON request body field — the status for this Commitments operation
titleNoJSON request body field — title of the Change Order Batch
designated_reviewer_idNoJSON request body field — unique identifier for the designated reviewer. This field is only supported for single-tier projects. Behavior is undefined in multi-tier projects.
change_order_idsNoJSON request body field — array of Change Order (PCO) IDs to link to this batch. This field is only supported for two-tier projects.
legacy_request_idsNoJSON request body field — array of Change Order Request IDs to link to this batch. This field is only supported for three-tier projects.
custom_field_%{custom_field_definition_id}NoJSON request body field — value 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 ...
change_event_attachment_idsNoJSON request body field — list of attachment IDs to attach. These must presently be associated with Change Events.
attachment_idsNoJSON request body field — existing attachments to preserve on the response
drawing_revision_idsNoJSON request body field — drawing Revisions to attach to the response
file_version_idsNoJSON request body field — file Versions to attach to the response
form_idsNoJSON request body field — forms to attach to the response
image_idsNoJSON request body field — images to attach to the response
upload_idsNoJSON request body field — uploads to attach to the response
Behavior3/5

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

Annotations indicate the tool is not read-only, not destructive, not idempotent. The description confirms it updates and returns the modified object, which is consistent. No additional behavioral traits like permissions, side effects, or error handling are disclosed, but annotations already cover basic safety. No contradiction with annotations.

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 concise at three sentences plus endpoint reference. It front-loads the action and resource. Every sentence adds value, though the API reference line could be considered extraneous for an AI agent. Overall efficient and well-structured.

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?

The tool has 29 parameters and no output schema. The description only states 'returns the modified object on success' without detailing the response structure. Given the complexity, more completeness is needed regarding what fields are returned or error scenarios. The description is incomplete for an agent to fully anticipate outcomes.

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 parameter schema provides full descriptions for all 29 parameters (100% coverage). The description adds the note 'only the supplied fields are changed', which clarifies PATCH semantics but is not parameter-specific. With full schema coverage, the description adds minimal extra meaning, meeting the baseline expectation.

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 verb 'Update' and the resource 'Commitment Change Order Batch', making the tool's purpose evident. It distinguishes the action from other tools, though it doesn't explicitly differentiate from siblings like 'update_commitment_change_order' or 'update_prime_change_order_batch'. The slight inconsistency with 'Commitments' vs batch is minor.

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 advises to update only supplied fields (PATCH behavior) and lists required parameters, which provides some usage context. However, it does not specify when to use this tool versus alternatives, or indicate any conditions where it should not be used. No exclusions or prerequisites are mentioned.

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