Skip to main content
Glama
TylerIlunga

Procore MCP Server

Retrieve Equipment

retrieve_equipment

Restore a piece of equipment in Procore by updating its Field Productivity record. Provide company ID, equipment ID, and optional fields to modify.

Instructions

Restore a piece of Equipment. Use this to update an existing Field Productivity records (only the supplied fields are changed). Updates the specified Field Productivity records and returns the modified object on success. Required parameters: company_id, id. Procore API: Project Management > Field Productivity. Endpoint: PATCH /rest/v1.0/companies/{company_id}/managed_equipment/{id}/restore

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
company_idYesURL path parameter — unique identifier for the company.
idYesURL path parameter — unique identifier of the Field Productivity resource
current_project_idNoJSON request body field — iD of the project the equipment is currently dispatched to
nameNoJSON request body field — name of the equipment
serial_numberNoJSON request body field — serial number of the equipment
identification_numberNoJSON request body field — identification number of the equipment
descriptionNoJSON request body field — description of the equipment
managed_equipment_make_idNoJSON request body field — iD of the equipment make
managed_equipment_model_idNoJSON request body field — iD of the equipment model
managed_equipment_type_idNoJSON request body field — iD of the equipment type
managed_equipment_category_idNoJSON request body field — iD of the equipment category
company_visibleNoJSON request body field — the company visible for this Field Productivity operation
yearNoJSON request body field — year the equipment was manufactured in
statusNoJSON request body field — the status for this Field Productivity operation
ownershipNoJSON request body field — the type of ownership
upload_uuidsNoJSON request body field — array of upload uuids
Behavior3/5

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

Annotations indicate readOnlyHint=false, destructiveHint=false, idempotentHint=false, consistent with a mutation. The description adds that it updates and returns the modified object, and provides the API endpoint. However, it does not disclose whether the operation is reversible, what side effects occur (e.g., reactivation of deleted record), or any rate limits. The lack of contradiction with annotations earns a mid score.

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 four sentences but contains redundant phrases (e.g., twice mentions updating Field Productivity records). It could be condensed to 'Restore a previously deleted equipment record. Required: company_id, id. Optional fields update if provided.' The API and endpoint info are useful but not essential for an AI agent. The description is not poorly structured, but could be more succinct.

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

Completeness3/5

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

Given the complexity (16 optional parameters, no output schema), the description provides the core action (restore/update) and required parameters. However, it lacks details on the meaning of 'restore', the behavior of optional fields (partially update vs. full replacement), and the structure of the response. The presence of a full schema compensates somewhat, but an agent might need more context to correctly invoke the tool.

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?

The input schema has 100% description coverage for all 16 parameters. The description only reiterates the required parameters (company_id, id) and adds the endpoint path. While this adds marginal value, the schema already provides sufficient meaning for each parameter. Therefore, the description does not significantly enhance parameter understanding.

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 'Restore a piece of Equipment' and 'updates…Field Productivity records', which indicates a mutation (restore/update). However, the tool name 'retrieve_equipment' implies a read operation, creating confusion. The purpose is somewhat clear from the description but is undermined by the contradictory name.

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, such as bulk_retrieve_managed_equipment or other equipment-related tools. The description does not specify prerequisites or scenarios where this tool is appropriate.

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