Procore MCP Server

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

With no annotations, the description carries full burden but provides minimal behavioral insight. It mentions 'PATCH' implying mutation but doesn't clarify permissions, side effects (e.g., overwriting data), error handling, or rate limits. This is inadequate for a bulk mutation tool.

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 concise with no wasted words, though it could be more informative. It's front-loaded with the core action but lacks depth. The inclusion of the HTTP method and path is efficient but doesn't add agent-facing value.

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 bulk mutation tool with no annotations and no output schema, the description is insufficient. It doesn't explain what constitutes a valid update, potential impacts, or response format. Given the complexity, more context is needed for safe and effective use.

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 description coverage is 100%, so parameters are documented in the schema. The description adds no additional meaning about 'time_and_material_timecards' array structure or update semantics. Baseline 3 is appropriate as the schema does the work.

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 states the action ('Bulk Update') and resource ('Time and material timecards'), but it's vague about what 'update' entails. It doesn't distinguish from sibling tools like 'bulk_create_time_and_material_timecards' or 'bulk_update_timecard_entries', leaving ambiguity about scope and differences.

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?

No guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives is provided. The description lacks context about prerequisites, appropriate scenarios, or comparisons to sibling tools like 'update_time_and_material_timecard' (singular) or other bulk operations.

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