Skip to main content
Glama
TylerIlunga

Procore MCP Server

Get Person'S Assignment History Data

get_persons_assignment_history_data
Read-onlyIdempotent

Retrieves the complete assignment history for a specific person, including project name, dates, and optional details like cost codes and labels.

Instructions

Fetches the assignment history for a specific Person, returning records of all assignments linked to them. Use this to fetch the full details of a specific Resource Planning records by its identifier. Returns a JSON object describing the requested Resource Planning records. Required parameters: company_id, person_id. Procore API: Resource Management > Resource Planning. Endpoint: GET /rest/v1.0/workforce-planning/v2/companies/{company_id}/people/{person_id}/reports/assignment-history

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
company_idYesURL path parameter — unique identifier for the company. This parameter accepts both formats: - **Recommended**: Procore company ID (integer) - Use this for new integrations - Legacy: LaborChart UUID format (uuid string...
person_idYesURL path parameter — unique identifier for the person
projectNameNoQuery string parameter — whether to include the project name for each assignment.
project_numberNoQuery string parameter — filters items by their exact project number. The query performs an exact match. Example usage: `/v2/companies/{company_id}/...?project_number=BR-2024`
assignmentStartNoQuery string parameter — whether to include the assignment start date.
assignmentEndNoQuery string parameter — whether to include the assignment end date.
start_timeNoQuery string parameter — will return the daily start time for each assignment.
end_timeNoQuery string parameter — will return the daily end time for each assignment.
cost_codeNoQuery string parameter — will return the name and UUID of the Cost Code for each assignment.
labelsNoQuery string parameter — will return the name and UUID of the Label for each assignment.
durationNoQuery string parameter — will return a calculated duration for each listed assignment.
pageNoPage number for paginated results (default: 1)
per_pageNoNumber of items per page (default: 100, max: 100)
Behavior3/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, destructiveHint=false, idempotentHint=true, covering safety. The description adds context about returning assignment history and the endpoint, but does not go beyond annotations.

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

Conciseness3/5

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

The description is reasonably concise but contains redundant information (e.g., 'Returns a JSON object' and endpoint details). The confusing second sentence detracts from clarity.

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

Completeness2/5

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

The tool has 13 parameters and no output schema. The description does not explain optional parameters, pagination, or return structure. For a moderately complex tool, this is insufficient.

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

Parameters3/5

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

Schema coverage is 100%, so all parameters are documented. The description only mentions required parameters (company_id, person_id) but does not add meaning beyond the schema. Baseline 3 applies.

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

Purpose3/5

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

The description states it fetches assignment history for a person, which is clear. However, the second sentence introduces confusion by suggesting it fetches a specific record by identifier, which contradicts the 'history' purpose. No differentiation from sibling tools like get_person_assignments.

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

Usage Guidelines2/5

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

The description includes 'Use this to fetch the full details of a specific Resource Planning records by its identifier,' which is misleading for a history endpoint. It provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives, nor any exclusions or prerequisites.

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