Skip to main content
Glama
TylerIlunga

Procore MCP Server

Create Company Tag

create_company_tag

Creates a Resource Planning Tag for a company in Procore, enabling categorization and grouping of resources. Specify name, accessibility, and group assignments.

Instructions

Creates a Resource Planning Tag for the given company. Use this to create a new Resource Planning records in Procore. Creates a new Resource Planning records and returns the created object on success (HTTP 201). Required parameters: company_id, company_id, name, globally_accessible, group_ids. Procore API: Resource Management > Resource Planning. Endpoint: POST /rest/v1.0/workforce-planning/v2/companies/{company_id}/tags

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
company_idYesJSON request body field — unique identifier for the company. NOTE - this is a Laborchart company ID.
nameYesJSON request body field — the Tag's name.
abbreviationNoJSON request body field — a 5-character max String representing the abbreviation that will appear in most Tag views. Defaults to the first 5 characters of the name if not provided.
categoriesNoJSON request body field — array of Tag Categories this Tag should be available to, if Tag Categories are enabled.
colorNoJSON request body field — hexadecimal color code for the Tag, used for categorization and visual distinction.
expr_days_warningNoJSON request body field — number of days before expiration when the Tag should be in "warning" mode. Only relevant if `require_expr_date` is true.
globally_accessibleYesJSON request body field — controls whether the Tag should be globally available to all current and future Groups.
group_idsYesJSON request body field — array of UUIDs for which Groups this Tag should be available to or be removed from depending on context. For adding availability, if `globally_accessible` is true, this can be an empty array.
require_expr_dateNoJSON request body field — controls whether the Tag should require an expiration date when applied to a Person.
Behavior3/5

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

The description states that the tool returns the created object on success and mentions HTTP 201. Since annotations already indicate readOnlyHint=false (not read-only) and destructiveHint=false (not destructive), the description adds minimal behavioral context beyond confirming the creation nature. It does not disclose authorization requirements, rate limits, or side effects.

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 relatively short but contains redundancy (e.g., 'Creates a new Resource Planning records' repeated) and a typo ('company_id, company_id'). It includes useful endpoint info but could be more concise. Not every sentence earns its place.

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?

Without an output schema, the description should explain return values more thoroughly, but it only mentions 'returns the created object'. It does not cover error handling, pagination, or the interplay between parameters like globally_accessible and group_ids. Given the tool's complexity (9 parameters with conditions), the description is incomplete.

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?

The input schema has 100% coverage with detailed descriptions for all 9 parameters. The description lists required parameters but adds no additional meaning beyond what the schema already provides. Thus, the description does not significantly enhance parameter understanding.

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 that the tool creates a Resource Planning Tag for a given company. The verb 'creates' and resource 'Resource Planning Tag' are specific. However, it is not fully distinguished from sibling creation tools, though the resource type is explicit. The repeated mention of 'Resource Planning records' slightly muddies the purpose.

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?

The description does not provide guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It does not mention when not to use it or suggest other tools for different scenarios. The instruction 'Use this to create a new Resource Planning records in Procore' is generic and does not help with differentiation among the many sibling tools.

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