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 company Folder' but does not disclose critical behavioral traits: whether deletion is permanent or reversible, required permissions, side effects (e.g., if contents are also deleted), or error conditions. The mention of '[Core/Documents] DELETE /rest/v1.0/companies/{company_id}/folders/{id}' hints at an API endpoint but does not clarify behavior.

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 and front-loaded with the core action ('Delete company Folder'). The additional API path detail is concise but could be more structured. It avoids unnecessary verbosity, though it lacks complete clarity.

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 destructive nature (deletion), no annotations, and no output schema, the description is inadequate. It fails to address safety concerns, return values, or error handling, leaving significant gaps for a mutation tool with potential irreversible effects.

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 clear parameter descriptions ('Unique identifier for the company', 'ID of the Folder'). The description adds no additional parameter semantics beyond the schema, but the schema is comprehensive, so a 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 'Delete company Folder' restates the tool name with minimal elaboration. It specifies the resource ('company Folder') but lacks a clear, specific verb beyond 'Delete' and does not distinguish from sibling tools (e.g., 'delete_project_folder'). It is tautological and vague about what deletion entails.

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 (e.g., 'delete_project_folder' or other deletion tools). The description does not mention prerequisites, exclusions, or contextual cues for selection, leaving the agent without usage direction.

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