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 of behavioral disclosure. While 'Delete' implies a destructive mutation, the description does not specify whether this is permanent, reversible, requires specific permissions, or has side effects (e.g., cascading deletions). It adds minimal context beyond the obvious.

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 extremely concise ('Delete Coordination Issue. [Project Management/Coordination Issues] DELETE /rest/v1.0/coordination_issues/{id}'), with no wasted words. It is front-loaded with the core action, though the inclusion of the API path is redundant for tool selection.

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 complexity of a deletion operation, no annotations, and no output schema, the description is incomplete. It fails to address critical aspects like confirmation prompts, error handling, return values, or safety warnings, leaving significant gaps for the agent.

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 ('id' and 'project_id') clearly documented in the schema. The description does not add any meaning beyond the schema (e.g., explaining relationships between parameters). With high schema coverage, 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 'Delete Coordination Issue' clearly states the verb (Delete) and resource (Coordination Issue), which is a specific action. However, it does not distinguish this tool from other deletion tools in the sibling list (e.g., 'delete_a_coordination_issue_rest_v2_0_v2_0'), leaving ambiguity about when to use this particular endpoint.

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 lacks context about prerequisites (e.g., permissions), exclusions, or comparisons to sibling tools like 'delete_a_coordination_issue_rest_v2_0_v2_0', 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.