Skip to main content
Glama
TylerIlunga

Procore MCP Server

Update Requisition (Subcontractor Invoice) Contract Item

update_requisition_subcontractor_invoice_contract_item

Update work completed, materials stored, and retainage amounts on a subcontractor invoice requisition contract item. Requires requisition ID, contract item ID, and project ID.

Instructions

This is a deprecated endpoint, please use /rest/v1.0/requisitions/{requisition_id}/bulk_item_update. 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: requisition_id, id, project_id. Procore API: Construction Financials > Commitments. Endpoint: PATCH /rest/v1.0/requisitions/{requisition_id}/contract_items/{id}

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
requisition_idYesURL path parameter — requisition (Subcontractor Invoice) ID
idYesURL path parameter — unique identifier of the Commitments resource
project_idYesQuery string parameter — unique identifier for the project.
work_completed_this_periodNoJSON request body field — the amount of work completed this period
materials_presently_storedNoJSON request body field — the amount of materials presently stored
work_completed_retainage_retained_this_periodNoJSON request body field — work completed retainage amount retained this period (admin user only, work_completed_this_period should be non-zero to hold a retainage)
materials_stored_retainage_currently_retainedNoJSON request body field — materials stored retainage amount currently retained (admin user, amount accounting only, materials_presently_stored should be non-zero to hold a retainage)
work_completed_retainage_released_this_periodNoJSON request body field — the amount of work completed retainage released this period
work_completed_this_period_quantityNoJSON request body field — work completed this period quantity (unit accounting contract only)
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations (readOnlyHint=false) indicate mutation, and the description adds that it's a partial update returning the modified object. No contradictions. It could mention authorization or rate limits but the annotation provides basic safety profile.

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 well-structured, front-loading the deprecation warning and alternative, then the update semantics and required params. It is informative without being overly verbose.

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

Completeness4/5

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

Given the tool's complexity (9 params, no output schema), the description adequately covers the purpose, update behavior, and required parameters. It lacks error handling details but matches typical standards for update tools.

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?

Schema coverage is 100% with detailed parameter descriptions. The description only repeats which parameters are required but adds no new semantics. Baseline 3 is appropriate.

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

Purpose5/5

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

The description clearly states the tool updates an existing Commitments (contract item) on a requisition, with partial update semantics (only supplied fields changed). It distinguishes from the sibling bulk update tool by noting deprecation and providing the alternative endpoint.

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

Usage Guidelines4/5

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

Explicitly says the tool is deprecated and recommends using the bulk_item_update endpoint instead. It also states the required parameters and that only supplied fields are changed. However, it does not compare to other update tools like 'update_requisition_subcontractor_invoice'.

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