Skip to main content
Glama
TylerIlunga

Procore MCP Server

list_company_vendors

Retrieve vendor information from Procore by specifying a company ID, with options to filter, search, and sort results for efficient vendor management.

Instructions

List company vendors. [Core/Directory] GET /rest/v1.0/vendors

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
viewNoSpecifies which view of the resource to return (which attributes should be present in the response). The default view is extended.
company_idYesUnique identifier for the company.
pageNoPage
per_pageNoElements per page
filters__origin_idNoOrigin ID. Returns item(s) with the specified Origin ID.
filters__searchNoReturn vendors where the search string matches the vendor name, keywords, origin_code, or ABN/EIN number
filters__created_atNoReturn items within a specific created at ISO8601 datetime range
filters__updated_atNoReturn items within a specific updated at ISO8601 datetime range
filters__standard_cost_code_id__NoReturns vendors associated with the specified standard cost code id(s)
filters__trade_id__NoReturns vendors associated with the specified trade id(s)
filters__id__NoReturns vendors with the specified id(s)
filters__parent_id__NoReturns vendors with the specified parent id(s)
sortNoReturn items with the specified sort
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 '[Core/Directory] GET /rest/v1.0/vendors', which hints at a read-only HTTP GET operation, but doesn't explicitly state it's safe/non-destructive, describe pagination behavior, or mention any authentication or rate limit requirements. For a tool with 13 parameters and no annotation coverage, this is insufficient.

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 with just two parts: the core purpose and an API endpoint reference. It's front-loaded with the essential action. However, the API endpoint detail adds minimal value for an AI agent and could be considered clutter, preventing a perfect score.

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 (13 parameters, no annotations, no output schema), the description is inadequate. It doesn't explain the return format, pagination, filtering capabilities, or how the 'view' parameter affects results. For a list operation with many filters, the agent needs more context about what to expect.

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 13 parameters. The description adds no parameter-specific information beyond the tool name implying 'company' context, which is already covered by the required 'company_id' parameter. Baseline 3 is appropriate when schema does all the work.

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 'List company vendors' clearly states the verb ('List') and resource ('company vendors'), making the basic purpose understandable. However, it doesn't differentiate this tool from other vendor-related tools (like 'list_project_vendors' or 'list_company_vendor_comments') that appear in the sibling list, leaving ambiguity about scope.

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. With many vendor-related sibling tools (e.g., 'list_project_vendors', 'list_company_vendor_comments', 'list_company_vendor_insurances'), the agent receives no help in selecting this specific tool for listing company-level vendors.

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