Procore MCP Server

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 'GET /rest/v1.0/budget_views', implying a read-only HTTP GET operation, but does not explicitly state safety (e.g., non-destructive), permissions, rate limits, pagination behavior, or output format. The HTTP method hint is insufficient for full behavioral disclosure.

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, compact sentence with a category tag and HTTP details. It is front-loaded with the core action ('List Budget Views') and avoids redundancy. However, the bracketed tag and path could be seen as slightly noisy.

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 list operation with 4 parameters, the description is inadequate. It does not explain what 'Budget Views' are, what the output contains, or how pagination/sorting works. The agent lacks sufficient context to use the tool effectively beyond basic parameter passing.

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%, with all parameters documented in the schema. The description adds no parameter-specific information beyond the schema. According to rules, baseline is 3 when schema coverage is high (>80%) and description adds no param info.

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 'List Budget Views. [Construction Financials/Budget] GET /rest/v1.0/budget_views' restates the tool name ('list_budget_views') with minimal elaboration. It adds a category tag '[Construction Financials/Budget]' and an HTTP method/path, but does not specify what 'Budget Views' are or what the tool actually returns. It distinguishes from siblings only by name, not by function.

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 any prerequisites, context, or comparison with other list/filter tools in the sibling set. The agent must infer usage from the name alone.

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