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' but does not disclose behavioral traits such as whether deletion is permanent, requires specific permissions, has side effects (e.g., resource deletion unless skipped), or any rate limits. The mention of 'skip_resource_deletion' in the schema hints at complexity, but the description does not explain it.

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, direct sentence with no wasted words, making it efficient. However, it lacks front-loaded critical information (e.g., behavioral risks) and includes an extraneous API path detail ('[Project Management/Document Markup] DELETE /rest/v1.0/...') that does not aid the AI agent.

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 complexity (7 parameters, destructive operation, no annotations, no output schema), the description is inadequate. It fails to address key aspects like the effect of deletion, the role of 'skip_resource_deletion', error handling, or what 'context' entails, leaving significant gaps for safe and correct usage.

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%, so the schema documents all parameters. The description adds no semantic meaning beyond the schema, such as explaining what 'context_type' or 'sub_context_type' represent or how query parameters filter deletions. 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 states the action ('Delete context') and resource ('by query parameters'), which clarifies the tool's purpose. However, it does not differentiate from sibling tools like 'delete_context_by_id' or explain what 'context' means in this domain, leaving some ambiguity.

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 does not mention sibling tools (e.g., 'delete_context_by_id') or specify conditions for using query-based deletion, offering no usage context.

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