Skip to main content
Glama
TylerIlunga

Procore MCP Server

Delete Webhooks Hook (Deprecated)

delete_webhooks_hook
DestructiveIdempotent

Permanently remove a webhooks hook from a company or project using its ID. Resolve the target ID with the list tool first to avoid 404 errors.

Instructions

Triggers must be deleted within a company and/or project scope. DEPRECATED: Procore has deprecated this endpoint (as of 2025-09-15). It is scheduled for removal on 2026-09-16; prefer a newer version of this resource where one exists, and use procore_search_endpoints to find it. Confirm the target id with the matching show or list tool before calling. id must identify an existing parent record — resolve it with the matching list tool first. Permanently removes the webhooks hook. This cannot be undone, and a repeat call returns 404. Failures come back as an error payload carrying the HTTP status — commonly 401 when the token has expired, 403 without tool permission, and 404 when an id does not resolve. Required parameters: id, company_id, project_id. Procore API: Platform - Developer Tools > Webhooks. Endpoint: DELETE /rest/v1.0/webhooks/hooks/{id}

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
idYesURL path parameter — unique identifier of the Webhooks resource
company_idYesQuery string parameter — unique identifier for the company. You must supply either a company_id or project_id.
project_idYesQuery string parameter — unique identifier for the project. You must supply either a company_id or project_id.
Behavior4/5

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

The description adds important behavioral details beyond the annotations, such as the permanent, irreversible nature of the deletion and that a repeat call returns 404. It also details common HTTP error statuses. This enriches the agent's understanding beyond the destructiveHint/idempotentHint flags.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness4/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

The description is longer than two sentences but is well-structured and front-loaded with the deprecation warning. Each sentence provides necessary information for using a destructive, deprecated tool, so it earns its place. It could be slightly condensed but remains effective.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness5/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

For a delete tool with no output schema, the description covers all essential aspects: purpose, deprecation, id resolution, permanence, error behavior, required parameters, and the API endpoint. Combined with the annotations, the agent has complete contextual information to act correctly.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters4/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

The schema already covers all parameters at 100% coverage, giving a baseline of 3. The description adds meaning by clarifying that id must identify an existing parent record resolved via a list tool, and that the operation is scoped to company and/or project. This goes beyond the schema's basic field descriptions.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose4/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description clearly states the tool's purpose with 'Permanently removes the webhooks hook,' a specific verb and resource. However, it doesn't explicitly differentiate from sibling tools like delete_company_webhooks_hook or delete_project_webhooks_hook, which may require additional inference.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines5/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

The description explicitly indicates the tool is deprecated and directs the agent to prefer a newer version via procore_search_endpoints. It also gives clear prerequisites, such as confirming the target id with a show or list tool before calling. This is exemplary usage guidance.

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

Install Server

Other Tools

Latest Blog Posts

MCP directory API

We provide all the information about MCP servers via our MCP API.

curl -X GET 'https://glama.ai/api/mcp/v1/servers/TylerIlunga/procore-mcp-server'

If you have feedback or need assistance with the MCP directory API, please join our Discord server