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 WBS Segment,' implying a destructive mutation, but doesn't disclose behavioral traits like permissions required, irreversibility, side effects, or rate limits. The API endpoint hints at a REST DELETE operation, but this is insufficient 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 action, but includes an API endpoint that may be redundant. It's efficient with no wasted sentences, though it could be more structured by separating purpose from technical details.

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 a destructive mutation tool with no annotations, no output schema, and 3 parameters, the description is inadequate. It doesn't explain the deletion's impact, return values, or error conditions, leaving significant gaps for agent understanding.

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 descriptions for company_id and id, but segment_item_list_id lacks context. The description adds no parameter semantics beyond the schema, not explaining relationships like which segment is deleted or the role of segment_item_list_id. Baseline 3 is appropriate as the schema does the heavy lifting.

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 Segment. [Construction Financials/Work Breakdown Structure] DELETE /rest/v1.0/companies/{company_id}/work_breakdown_structure/segments/{id}' restates the tool name ('Delete WBS Segment') and adds an API endpoint, but it's tautological and doesn't specify what a WBS segment is or what deletion entails. It distinguishes from siblings by focusing on deletion, but lacks specificity beyond the name.

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 does not mention prerequisites, consequences, or sibling tools for comparison, leaving the agent with no usage context.

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