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 meeting' which implies a destructive operation, but doesn't disclose permanence, permissions needed, side effects, or error conditions. The HTTP method 'DELETE' is noted, but no behavioral details beyond the basic action.

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 very concise—two short phrases. However, the inclusion of the API path 'DELETE /rest/v1.0/meetings/{id}' is somewhat redundant with the tool name and could be considered clutter, though it doesn't significantly harm readability.

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?

For a destructive tool with no annotations and no output schema, the description is inadequate. It doesn't explain what happens upon deletion (e.g., irreversible, cascading effects), success/error responses, or required permissions, leaving significant gaps for safe agent invocation.

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 ('ID of the meeting', 'Unique identifier for the project.'). The description adds no additional parameter context, so it meets the baseline for high schema coverage without adding value.

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 meeting' clearly states the action (delete) and resource (meeting), but it's overly simplistic and doesn't distinguish from sibling tools like 'delete_meeting_v1_1' or 'delete_meeting_category_v2_0'. It lacks specificity about what kind of meeting or context.

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 on when to use this tool versus alternatives. The description includes '[Project Management/Meetings]' which hints at context but doesn't provide explicit usage rules, prerequisites, or comparisons with sibling delete tools.

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