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 Stamp' which implies a destructive operation, but doesn't disclose behavioral traits like required permissions, whether deletion is permanent or reversible, or any side effects. This is a significant gap 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 essential action ('Delete Stamp'). The inclusion of the API endpoint is somewhat redundant but not wasteful. It could be more structured but remains efficient.

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 tool's destructive nature, lack of annotations, and no output schema, the description is inadequate. It fails to address critical aspects like confirmation prompts, error handling, or return values, leaving the agent with incomplete operational context.

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 three parameters clearly documented in the schema. The description adds no additional parameter information beyond the schema, which is acceptable given the high coverage, resulting in a baseline score of 3.

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 Stamp') and the resource ('Stamp'), making the purpose unambiguous. It also includes the context '[Project Management/Document Markup]' which helps differentiate it from other deletion tools, though it doesn't explicitly distinguish from sibling tools like 'delete_stamp' (without version).

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 description lacks any mention of prerequisites, conditions, or comparisons with sibling tools (e.g., 'delete_stamp'), leaving the agent without usage context.

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