Skip to main content
Glama
TylerIlunga

Procore MCP Server

Update Witness Statement

update_witness_statement

Update an existing witness statement's details, such as statement text, date received, or attachments, in Procore Incidents.

Instructions

Updates the specified Witness Statement. Use this to update an existing Incidents (only the supplied fields are changed). Updates the specified Incidents and returns the modified object on success. Required parameters: project_id, id. Procore API: Project Management > Incidents. Endpoint: PATCH /rest/v1.0/projects/{project_id}/incidents/witness_statements/{id}

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
project_idYesURL path parameter — unique identifier for the project.
idYesURL path parameter — witness Statement ID
incident_idNoQuery string parameter — unique identifier of the incident
statementNoJSON request body field — the account of the event by the witness in rich text form.
date_receivedNoJSON request body field — date that the Witness Statement was received. This assumes the dates provided are in the project timezone.
witness_idNoJSON request body field — unique identifier of the witness
upload_uuidsNoJSON request body field — array of uploaded file UUIDs.
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
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 ...
recordingNoJSON request body field — the recording for this Incidents operation
Behavior3/5

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

Annotations indicate this is not read-only (readOnlyHint=false) and not explicitly destructive (destructiveHint=false). The description adds that only supplied fields are changed and that the modified object is returned on success. It does not disclose side effects, error handling, or idempotency. 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.

Conciseness3/5

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

The description includes 4 sentences, but it is slightly verbose with redundant references to 'Incidents' and includes API endpoint details that may not be necessary for an AI agent. It could be more streamlined.

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?

With 13 parameters and no output schema, the description does not explain the purpose of witness statements, prerequisites (e.g., existing incident), or how the object is structured upon return. The openWorldHint annotation suggests flexibility, but the description lacks essential context for correct usage.

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 descriptions for all parameters. The description adds minimal extra meaning beyond the schema, such as noting that only supplied fields are changed and that required parameters are project_id and id. This is adequate but not enhanced.

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 'Updates the specified Witness Statement' with a verb and resource, but it erroneously also mentions 'Updates the specified Incidents', which could confuse an AI agent about the actual target resource. The primary purpose is evident despite this copy-paste error.

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

Usage Guidelines2/5

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 among the many sibling update tools. It says 'Use this to update an existing...' but does not specify conditions, prerequisites, or exclusions. The mention of 'Incidents' is also misleading regarding the scope.

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