Skip to main content
Glama
TylerIlunga

Procore MCP Server

Create A Task Item Comment

create_a_task_item_comment

Create a comment on a task item in Procore, including status updates and optional file attachments.

Instructions

Create a new task item comment for a given task_item_id and created_by_id. Use this to create a new Tasks in Procore. Creates a new Tasks and returns the created object on success (HTTP 201). Required parameters: company_id, project_id, task_item_id. Procore API: Core > Tasks. Endpoint: POST /rest/v1.0/companies/{company_id}/projects/{project_id}/task_item_comments

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
company_idYesURL path parameter — unique identifier for the company.
project_idYesURL path parameter — unique identifier for the project.
commentNoJSON request body field — the message of the comment
statusNoJSON request body field — the status of the task item at the time the comment is created. Standard users who are assigned to the task item cannot change the status to closed or void.
task_item_idYesJSON request body field — the task_item associated with the comment
attachmentsNoJSON request body field — attachments. To upload attachments you must upload the entire payload as `multipart/form-data` content-type and specify each parameter as form-data together with `attachments[]` as files.
drawing_revision_idsNoJSON request body field — drawing Revisions to attach to the response
file_version_idsNoJSON request body field — file Versions to attach to the response
form_idsNoJSON request body field — forms to attach to the response
image_idsNoJSON request body field — images to attach to the response
upload_idsNoJSON request body field — uploads to attach to the response
document_management_document_revision_idsNoJSON request body field — pDM document to attach to the response
Behavior3/5

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

Annotations already provide readOnlyHint=false and destructiveHint=false. The description adds that it returns the created object on success (HTTP 201) and mentions the endpoint. However, it does not disclose non-idempotency or permission requirements, and introduces confusion by referring to 'Tasks' instead of comments.

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 four sentences. It starts with the main action but has redundant phrasing ('Use this to create a new Tasks' repeats the idea). It could be more concise and avoid repetition.

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

Completeness2/5

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

With 12 parameters including enums and multipart upload requirements, the description only covers mandatory fields. It omits details on optional parameters like status, attachments, and their constraints. The tool's complexity demands more comprehensive description.

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

Parameters2/5

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

Input schema has 100% coverage with parameter descriptions. The description mentions required parameters (company_id, project_id, task_item_id) but incorrectly introduces 'created_by_id' which is not in the schema, misleading the agent. It adds no new insight beyond the schema.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose4/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description clearly states the action is to create a new task item comment. However, it later confuses by saying 'create a new Tasks in Procore', which is inconsistent with the tool's resource being a comment. The primary purpose is discernible but marred by this inconsistency.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines2/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives (e.g., create_task_item). It merely lists required parameters and the API endpoint, with no contextual advice on usage scenarios or exclusions.

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