Update Estimating Settings

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

Annotations already indicate a non-read-only, idempotent, non-destructive operation. The description adds rich context: partial update behavior, default company_id behavior, return value on success, and specific error HTTP statuses (401, 403, 404). This goes well beyond the structured annotations and gives the agent a clear picture of its effects.

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 compact and front-loaded: the first sentence states the purpose, followed by usage, defaults, response, and error handling. Each sentence adds specific, actionable detail without filler.

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 tool with 6 parameters and no output schema, the description covers invocation (required company_id, default), behavior (partial update), return value, and error cases. The nested project_stages parameter is adequately described in the schema, and the API endpoint and version are provided. This is complete for an agent to invoke the tool correctly.

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?

Schema coverage is 100%, so the schema already documents all parameters. The description adds value by explaining that company_id defaults to the value set by procore_set_config, which is not in the schema, and clarifies the partial-update semantics for omitted fields. This exceeds the baseline expected for full schema coverage.

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 mutable Estimating Settings for the company, using a specific verb and resource. It also explicitly notes Create and Delete are not supported, which narrows the operation's scope and distinguishes it from siblings like get_estimating_settings.

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 explicit usage guidance: only fields intended to change should be sent, omitted fields keep their current values, and company_id defaults to the procore_set_config value when omitted. It also states 'Create and Delete are not supported,' which is an explicit when-not instruction.

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