Skip to main content
Glama
TylerIlunga

Procore MCP Server

Adds Attachments To A Shipment Resource.

adds_attachments_to_a_shipment_resource

Create and attach a file to a specific shipment in Procore Materials Management by providing shipment, company, and project IDs. Returns the new attachment with its ID.

Instructions

Either provide a file_id already obtained from the File Access Service (FAS), or omit it to have FAS create a new file record. The response includes the file_id and, when FAS creates the record, an upload URL the client uses to upload the file content. company_id and project_id default to the values set by procore_set_config when omitted, and id must identify an existing parent record — resolve it with the matching list tool first. Creates the attachment and returns it with its new id (HTTP 201); calling it again creates another record. 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: id, company_id, project_id. Procore API (v2.0): Resource Management > Materials Management. Endpoint: POST /rest/v2.0/companies/{company_id}/projects/{project_id}/materials_mgmt/shipments/{id}/attachments

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
idYesURL path parameter — the ID of the shipment resource to which attachments will be added.
company_idYesURL path parameter — the company identifier
project_idYesURL path parameter — the project identifier
Behavior5/5

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

Beyond the annotations, the description discloses that the call is non-idempotent ('calling it again creates another record'), describes the response including an upload URL when FAS creates the file, and details common error statuses (401, 403, 404). This adds significant context beyond the structured 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 is a single dense paragraph with no bullet points or structure, and repeats 'Required parameters' which is already in the schema. While information-rich, it could be better organized and trimmed.

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?

The description covers the workflow, response behavior, error scenarios, and prerequisites, which is fairly complete for a write tool with no output schema. Minor gaps include lack of detail on how to use the upload URL and no mention of pagination or further response structure.

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%, so the baseline is 3. The description adds context about FAS and parent record resolution, but it also introduces confusion by stating company_id/project_id default when omitted while the schema marks them as required. Overall, it adds some meaning but not without inconsistency.

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 creates attachments for a shipment resource, using specific verbs and resource naming. It distinguishes itself from sibling tools by mentioning the shipment resource and the full API endpoint path.

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?

The description explains the two usage modes (provide existing FAS file_id or omit to create new file), and instructs to resolve the parent shipment 'id' with a list tool first. It does not explicitly name alternatives but gives clear contextual guidance for when this tool applies.

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