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. It states 'Create a batch' (implying a write/mutation operation) and includes a POST endpoint hint, but lacks critical behavioral details like permissions required, rate limits, idempotency, or what happens on partial failure. The description adds minimal context beyond the implied mutation.

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, efficient sentence that front-loads the core action. It includes an endpoint hint ('POST /rest/v1.0/bim_viewpoints/batch') which, while slightly technical, is concise. No wasted words, though the '[Preconstruction/BIM]' tag adds minor clutter.

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 complexity of a batch creation tool with no annotations and no output schema, the description is inadequate. It lacks information on response format, error handling, side effects, or success criteria. For a mutation tool with zero annotation coverage, this leaves significant gaps for an AI agent to operate safely.

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%, with parameters 'project_id' and 'bim_viewpoints' well-documented in the schema. The description adds no additional parameter semantics, such as format examples for the array items or the 'Limited to 100 items per request' constraint (which is already in the schema). Baseline 3 is appropriate as the schema does the heavy lifting.

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 clearly states the action ('Create a batch of BIM Viewpoints') and the resource ('BIM Viewpoints'), making the purpose evident. It distinguishes from individual creation tools by specifying 'batch', though it doesn't explicitly differentiate from similar batch tools like 'create_a_batch_of_bim_model_revision_viewpoints' among siblings.

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 mentions '[Preconstruction/BIM]' as a context tag but gives no explicit when/when-not instructions, prerequisites, or named alternatives, leaving usage unclear relative to sibling tools.

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