Update Cost Code

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

Annotations already indicate readOnlyHint=false, destructiveHint=false, idempotentHint=false, and openWorldHint=true. The description adds valuable context: it updates records, only changes supplied fields, and returns the modified object on success. This goes beyond annotations without contradiction.

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: three sentences that front-load the purpose and include key details like partial update and return value. The Procore API and endpoint info is relevant but could be moved to a separate field. Overall efficient.

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?

Given no output schema and the tool's complexity as an update operation, the description adequately covers the basic behavior and return value. However, it lacks details on error handling, prerequisites (e.g., existing cost code), or permissions, leaving some gaps for the agent.

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?

All four parameters are described in the input schema (100% coverage), so the baseline is 3. The description only restates required parameters without adding new meaning or format details, meeting but not exceeding expectations.

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 states the tool updates a specific Cost Code and explains it modifies Work Breakdown Structure records. It includes the verb 'update' and the resource 'Cost Code', effectively distinguishing it from other tools in the large sibling set.

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 implies usage for updating existing WBS records and notes partial update behavior, but does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives like create_cost_code or list_cost_codes. No when-not or alternative guidance is provided.

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