Skip to main content
Glama
TylerIlunga

Procore MCP Server

list_checklist_inspections_items

Retrieve inspection checklist items from Procore projects with filtering and pagination options to manage quality control workflows.

Instructions

List Checklist (Inspections) Items. [Project Management/Inspections] GET /rest/v1.0/projects/{project_id}/checklist/list_items

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
project_idYesUnique identifier for the project.
pageNoPage
per_pageNoElements per page
filters__idNoReturn item(s) with the specified IDs.
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__section_idNoReturn item(s) with the specified Checklist Section IDs
filters__list_idNoReturn item(s) with the specified Checklist List IDs
filters__item_response_statusNoFilter item(s) with matching item_response status.
sortNoSort item(s) by the chosen param; check below for a list of options. The direction of sorting is ascending by default; for descending sort, insert the - symbol before the param.
Behavior2/5

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 indicates a list operation (read-only) but does not disclose behavioral traits such as pagination behavior, rate limits, authentication requirements, or what happens with large result sets. The mention of 'GET' implies a safe operation, but this is not explicitly stated.

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 brief but includes unnecessary details like the API path 'GET /rest/v1.0/projects/{project_id}/checklist/list_items' which doesn't aid the agent. It is front-loaded with the core purpose, but the extra information reduces conciseness without adding value.

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 tool's complexity (9 parameters, no output schema, no annotations), the description is inadequate. It lacks information on output format, error handling, pagination, and how filters interact. For a list tool with multiple filtering options, more context is needed to guide effective use.

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 the schema fully documents all 9 parameters. The description adds no additional parameter semantics beyond what the schema provides, such as explaining filter interactions or default values. Baseline 3 is appropriate when the schema does the heavy lifting.

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 the tool's purpose as 'List Checklist (Inspections) Items', which is a clear verb+resource combination. However, it does not differentiate from sibling tools like 'list_checklist_inspections_items_v1_1' or other list tools, and includes extraneous API path details that don't clarify the purpose.

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 provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It mentions a category '[Project Management/Inspections]' but does not specify prerequisites, exclusions, or compare it to similar list tools in the sibling set.

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