Skip to main content
Glama
TylerIlunga

Procore MCP Server

list_all_equipment_project

Retrieve and filter all equipment records for a specific Procore project to manage inventory, track status, and monitor maintenance schedules.

Instructions

List all equipment. [Project Management/Field Productivity] GET /rest/v1.0/projects/{project_id}/managed_equipment

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
project_idYesUnique identifier for the project.
pageNoPage
per_pageNoElements per page
filters__updated_atNoReturn item(s) last updated within the specified ISO 8601 datetime range. Formats: `YYYY-MM-DD`...`YYYY-MM-DD` - Date `YYYY-MM-DDTHH:MM:SSZ`...`YYYY-MM-DDTHH:MM:SSZ` - DateTime with UTC Offset `YYY...
filters__managed_equipment_idNoReturn item(s) with the specified Managed Equipment ID.
filters__managed_equipment_category_idNoReturn item(s) with the specified Managed Equipment Category ID.
filters__managed_equipment_type_idNoReturn item(s) with the specified Managed Equipment Type ID.
filters__managed_equipment_make_idNoReturn item(s) with the specified Managed Equipment Make ID.
filters__managed_equipment_model_idNoReturn item(s) with the specified Managed Equipment Model ID.
filters__company_visibleNoIf true, return item(s) with 'company visible' status.
filters__current_project_idNoReturn item(s) with the specified current project ID.
filters__yearNoReturn item(s) with the specified year.
filters__statusNoReturns item(s) matching the specified status value.
filters__last_service_dateNoReturn item(s) with a last service date within the specified ISO 8601 datetime range.
filters__next_service_dateNoReturn item(s) with a next service date within the specified ISO 8601 datetime range.
filters__onsiteNoOnsite Dates. Returns item(s) with the specified range of onsite dates.
filters__offsiteNoOffsite Dates. Returns item(s) with the specified range of offsite dates.
filters__ownershipNoReturns only item(s) with the specified ownership value. Must be one of Owned, Rented, or Sub.
filters__vendor_idNoReturn item(s) with the specified Vendor ID.
filters__induction_statusNoReturns item(s) with the specified inudction status.
Behavior2/5

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden. It mentions 'List all equipment' but doesn't disclose that this is a paginated API (implied by page/per_page parameters), that it supports extensive filtering (20 parameters), or what the output format might be. The description lacks behavioral context like rate limits, authentication needs, or whether it's read-only.

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 extremely concise - just 5 words plus a context tag and endpoint. It's front-loaded with the core purpose. However, the endpoint path inclusion feels redundant with the tool name and doesn't add value for an AI agent. Every word earns its place, but more context would be helpful.

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?

Given the complexity (20 parameters, no annotations, no output schema), the description is inadequate. It doesn't explain the extensive filtering capabilities, pagination behavior, or return format. For a tool with this many parameters and no structured output documentation, the description should provide more operational context.

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 description coverage is 100%, so parameters are well-documented in the schema itself. The description adds no parameter-specific information beyond the tool name implying a project_id requirement. With high schema coverage, the baseline score of 3 is appropriate as the description doesn't compensate but doesn't need to.

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 'List all equipment' which is a clear verb+resource combination, but it's overly broad given the tool's name 'list_all_equipment_project' and the required project_id parameter. It doesn't distinguish itself from sibling tools like 'get_all_equipment_company_v2_0' or 'search_all_equipment_project', leaving the scope ambiguous.

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?

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives. The description includes a project context tag '[Project Management/Field Productivity]' and the endpoint path shows it's project-specific, but there's no explicit comparison to company-level equipment listing tools or filtered search tools in the sibling list.

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