Skip to main content
Glama
TylerIlunga

Procore MCP Server

Update Witness Statement

update_witness_statement
Idempotent

Update an existing witness statement in Procore by sending only the fields you want to change; omitted fields keep their current values. Requires project ID and witness statement ID.

Instructions

Updates the specified Witness Statement. Send only the fields you intend to change; omitted fields keep their current values. Pass the record's fields as top-level arguments — they are nested under "witness_statement" in the request payload for you. project_id defaults to the value set by procore_set_config when omitted, and id must identify an existing parent record — resolve it with the matching list tool first. Returns the modified witness statement on success. Failures come back as an error payload carrying the HTTP status — commonly 401 when the token has expired, 403 without tool permission, and 404 when an id does not resolve. 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
idYesURL path parameter — witness Statement ID
form_idsNoJSON request body field — forms to attach to the response
image_idsNoJSON request body field — images to attach to the response
recordingNoJSON request body field — the recording for this Incidents operation
statementNoJSON request body field — the account of the event by the witness in rich text form.
project_idYesURL path parameter — unique identifier for the project.
witness_idNoJSON request body field — unique identifier of the witness
incident_idNoQuery string parameter — unique identifier of the incident
upload_uuidsNoJSON request body field — array of uploaded file UUIDs.
date_receivedNoJSON request body field — date that the Witness Statement was received. This assumes the dates provided are in the project timezone.
file_version_idsNoJSON request body field — file Versions to attach to the response
drawing_revision_idsNoJSON request body field — drawing Revisions 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 ...
Behavior5/5

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

Beyond annotations, the description discloses partial-update behavior, automatic nesting of top-level arguments into the request payload, project_id defaulting, and specific HTTP error codes (401, 403, 404). This significantly enriches the model's understanding of the tool's runtime behavior.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness5/5

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

The description is dense but well-structured. Each sentence contributes practical information: purpose, partial update, argument handling, defaults, id resolution, return value, error scenarios, and endpoint. No filler or redundancy.

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

Completeness5/5

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

For a tool with 13 parameters and no output schema, this description is remarkably complete. It covers prerequisites, configuration defaults, error handling, return value, and the exact API path, leaving little ambiguity for an AI agent.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters4/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

The schema already covers all parameters with descriptions, so baseline is 3. The description adds value by explaining the top-level argument nesting and the default behavior of project_id, plus the requirement that id must reference an existing parent record resolved via the list tool.

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 opens with 'Updates the specified Witness Statement', clearly stating the verb and resource. It also includes the specific API endpoint and domain (Project Management > Incidents), distinguishing it from sibling tools like create, list, show, and destroy.

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?

It provides actionable guidance: 'Send only the fields you intend to change; omitted fields keep their current values', instructs to resolve id with 'the matching list tool first', and mentions the project_id default from procore_set_config. It doesn't explicitly contrast with create, but the update semantics make the distinction clear.

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