Procore MCP Server

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must fully disclose behavior. It only states the action ('Delete') without mentioning critical details: whether deletion is permanent or reversible, required permissions, side effects (e.g., if it affects linked data), or error conditions. This is inadequate for a destructive operation.

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 but inefficient. It repeats the name, includes technical endpoint details (which may be irrelevant for an AI agent), and wastes space on brackets and HTTP method instead of focusing on user-facing guidance. It's concise but poorly structured for its purpose.

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 severely incomplete. It fails to explain the consequences of deletion, success/error responses, or any behavioral nuances, leaving the agent ill-equipped to use it safely or effectively.

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 File', 'Unique identifier for the project.'). The description adds no extra parameter context, but the schema suffices, meeting the baseline for high coverage.

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 project File. [Core/Documents] DELETE /rest/v1.0/files/{id}' restates the tool name ('Delete project File') and adds technical endpoint details, but it's tautological and lacks specificity. It doesn't clarify what a 'project File' is or distinguish it from other deletion tools (e.g., delete_company_file, delete_project_folder).

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 many deletion tools (e.g., delete_company_file, delete_project_folder, delete_a_single_project), but the description offers no comparison or context for selection.

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