Procore MCP Server

Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden. It mentions 'DELETE' in the endpoint, implying a destructive operation, but doesn't explicitly state that data is permanently removed, warn about permissions, or describe side effects. This is inadequate for a mutation tool with zero annotation coverage.

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. However, the inclusion of the endpoint path ('DELETE /rest/v1.0/...') and category tag ('[Project Management/Coordination Issues]') adds minor clutter without enhancing clarity for an AI agent, slightly reducing efficiency.

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 deletion tool with no annotations and no output schema, the description is incomplete. It lacks critical context such as what happens upon deletion (e.g., irreversible), required permissions, error conditions, or confirmation of success. This leaves 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%, with clear parameter descriptions (e.g., 'Coordination Issue ID'). The description adds no parameter details beyond the schema, but since the schema is well-documented, the baseline score of 3 is appropriate as it doesn't detract from understanding.

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') and resource ('Procore Item Association'), which is clear. However, it doesn't specify what a 'Procore Item Association' is or distinguish this tool from sibling tools like 'delete_procore_item_associations' (bulk delete) or 'delete_viewpoint_and_procore_item_association', leaving the purpose somewhat vague.

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 sibling list includes 'bulk_delete_procore_item_associations' and 'delete_viewpoint_and_procore_item_association', but the description doesn't mention these or explain prerequisites like needing specific IDs, so usage context is lacking.

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