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 'Delete Catalog', implying a destructive mutation, but fails to disclose critical behavioral traits such as whether deletion is permanent, requires admin rights, affects related data, or has confirmation steps. This leaves significant gaps for a destructive operation.

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 brief but includes redundant information (the HTTP endpoint) that doesn't add value for tool selection. It could be more front-loaded with actionable context. However, it avoids unnecessary verbosity, keeping to a single sentence.

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 this is a destructive tool with no annotations and no output schema, the description is inadequate. It doesn't cover behavioral aspects like irreversibility, permissions, or error handling, nor does it explain what happens post-deletion (e.g., confirmation message). For a mutation tool, this leaves too many unknowns.

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 both parameters ('catalog_id', 'company_id') documented in the schema. The description adds no additional meaning about parameters beyond the HTTP path hint. Since the schema does the heavy lifting, the baseline score of 3 is appropriate.

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 ('Delete') and resource ('Catalog'), specifying it's for 'Preconstruction/Cost Catalog'. It distinguishes itself from siblings like 'delete_category' or 'delete_subcategory' by focusing on catalogs, though it doesn't explicitly contrast with other delete operations in the list.

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 is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives. The description lacks context about prerequisites (e.g., needing specific permissions), consequences (e.g., irreversible deletion), or when to choose this over other deletion tools like 'delete_catalog_v2_0' (if duplicates exist).

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