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', implying a destructive mutation, but fails to disclose critical behavioral traits: whether deletion is permanent or reversible, required permissions, side effects (e.g., cascading impacts), rate limits, or error conditions. The description adds minimal value beyond the implied mutation.

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 concise with two sentences, but the second sentence is a verbose API endpoint path that adds little value for an AI agent. The first sentence is under-specified, but overall, there is minimal waste, and the structure is straightforward.

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 is a destructive delete operation with no annotations and no output schema, the description is incomplete. It lacks information on success/error responses, side effects, and usage context. For a mutation tool with zero annotation coverage, this description fails to provide necessary behavioral and output 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 clear parameter descriptions (e.g., 'Unique identifier for the company'). The description adds no additional parameter semantics beyond the schema. According to rules, with high schema coverage, the baseline is 3 even without param info in the description.

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 Wbs Attribute Item' is a tautology that merely restates the tool name. It lacks a specific verb and does not clarify what a 'Wbs Attribute Item' is or what deletion entails. While it includes a context hint '[Construction Financials/Work Breakdown Structure]', this is insufficient for distinguishing purpose from sibling tools.

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 does not mention prerequisites, consequences, or any sibling tools that might be related (e.g., 'delete_wbs_attributes_v2_0' or 'create_wbs_attribute_item_v2_0'). Without such context, an agent cannot make informed decisions.

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