Procore MCP Server

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It only states 'Bulk Update Timecard Entries' without explaining what 'bulk update' means operationally—whether it overwrites, merges, or appends data, what permissions are required, or what happens on partial failures. This is inadequate for a mutation tool with 22 parameters.

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 a single phrase with no structure, failing to front-load critical information. While concise, it is under-specified—every word does not earn its place because it lacks essential details. This is a case of brevity at the expense of clarity, not effective conciseness.

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?

Given the tool's complexity (22 parameters, no annotations, no output schema), the description is insufficient. It does not explain the tool's behavior, return values, error handling, or operational constraints. For a bulk mutation tool in a system with many similar tools, this leaves the agent poorly equipped to use it correctly.

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 the schema fully documents all 22 parameters. The description adds no parameter-specific information beyond the tool name, but the schema provides detailed descriptions for each property. The baseline score of 3 reflects adequate coverage by the schema alone.

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 'Bulk Update Timecard Entries' is a tautology that merely restates the tool name, lacking specificity about what 'bulk update' entails. It does not distinguish this tool from sibling tools like 'bulk_create_timecard_entries' or 'update_timecard_entries', leaving the agent unclear about its unique function.

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?

The description provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It does not mention prerequisites, appropriate contexts, or exclusions, leaving the agent with no usage instructions. Given the many sibling tools for timecard operations, this omission is significant.

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