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 mentions it's a GET operation, implying read-only, but doesn't clarify pagination behavior, rate limits, authentication requirements, or error conditions. The endpoint path suggests it returns exchange rates, but behavioral details are lacking.

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 includes low-value technical details like the REST endpoint path that don't aid an AI agent. The first sentence is front-loaded with the purpose, but the second sentence is redundant for tool selection.

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 no annotations, no output schema, and a read operation with pagination, the description is incomplete. It doesn't explain what 'exchange rates' entail, the format of the response, or how to handle pagination. For a tool with three parameters and no structured output, more context is needed.

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%, so the schema fully documents the parameters (company_id, page, per_page). The description doesn't add any meaning beyond what the schema provides, such as explaining what 'exchange rates' are or how pagination works. Baseline 3 is appropriate when 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 clearly states the action ('Get') and resource ('Company Exchange Rates'), and provides context with the category '[Construction Financials/Currency Configurations]'. It distinguishes from siblings by focusing on exchange rates, but doesn't explicitly differentiate from similar tools like 'get_project_exchange_rates' or 'create_company_exchange_rates'.

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 on when to use this tool versus alternatives is provided. The description includes a REST endpoint path, but this doesn't help an AI agent understand the appropriate context or prerequisites for invocation.

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