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 states the tool performs a deletion (destructive operation) but provides no additional behavioral context such as permissions required, whether deletion is reversible, confirmation prompts, or error handling. The description is minimal and lacks critical safety information.

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 (one sentence plus API endpoint), but this brevity comes at the cost of completeness. While it's front-loaded with the core action, it lacks necessary contextual information. The API endpoint inclusion is redundant for tool selection purposes.

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 operation with no annotations and no output schema, the description is inadequate. It doesn't explain what happens after deletion, whether there are confirmation requirements, what permissions are needed, or potential side effects. The minimal description leaves significant gaps for a tool that permanently removes compliance documents.

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 all parameters clearly documented in the input schema. The description adds no additional parameter semantics beyond what the schema provides, but the schema adequately covers all four required IDs. Baseline 3 is appropriate given the high schema 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 clearly states the action ('Delete') and the resource ('requisition compliance document'), providing a specific verb+resource combination. It distinguishes itself from sibling tools by specifying the exact resource type, though it doesn't explicitly differentiate from other deletion tools in the list.

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 doesn't mention prerequisites, conditions, or any context for usage, leaving the agent with no usage instructions beyond the basic action.

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