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 'GET' implying a read-only operation, but doesn't disclose behavioral traits like pagination behavior (implied by 'page' and 'per_page' parameters but not explained), rate limits, authentication needs, or what the summary output contains. The description lacks critical context for safe and effective use.

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 a single sentence that efficiently combines the tool's name, domain context ('Construction Financials/Budget'), and REST endpoint. It's front-loaded with the core purpose. However, including the full endpoint path is somewhat redundant with the tool name and could be trimmed for brevity.

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 complexity (13 parameters, no annotations, no output schema), the description is inadequate. It doesn't explain what a 'snapshot summary' entails, the structure of the output, or how pagination and filtering work together. For a tool with many parameters and no output schema, more context is needed to understand the tool's behavior and results.

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 all 13 parameters. The description adds no parameter-specific information beyond what's in the schema (e.g., it doesn't clarify the meaning of 'snapshots' or how filters interact). Baseline 3 is appropriate as the schema does the heavy lifting, but the description doesn't compensate with additional insights.

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 states 'Get Company Snapshots Summary' which indicates a retrieval operation for summary data, but it's vague about what 'snapshots' specifically are (e.g., financial/budget status snapshots). It includes '[Construction Financials/Budget]' and a REST endpoint path, which adds some context but doesn't clearly distinguish this tool from other summary or snapshot-related tools in the sibling list.

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, appropriate contexts, or compare it to other tools (e.g., other summary or snapshot tools in the sibling list). The agent must infer usage from the endpoint path and parameters alone.

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