Skip to main content
Glama
TylerIlunga

Procore MCP Server

Show All Commitment Change Orders

show_all_commitment_change_orders
Read-onlyIdempotent

Get a paginated list of commitment change orders for a Procore project. Filter by ID, batch, contract, vendor, status, and more.

Instructions

Returns all Commitment Change Orders for the specified Project. This endpoint currently only supports projects using 1 and 2 tier change order configurations. Use this to fetch the full details of a specific Commitments by its identifier. Returns a paginated JSON array of Commitments. Use page and per_page to control pagination; the response includes pagination metadata. Required parameters: project_id. Procore API: Construction Financials > Commitments. Endpoint: GET /rest/v1.0/projects/{project_id}/commitment_change_orders

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
project_idYesURL path parameter — unique identifier for the project.
viewNoQuery string parameter — specifies Which view (which attributes) of the resource is going to be present in the response. the extended view includes change events data, while the default view does not.
sortNoQuery string parameter — direction (asc/desc) can be controlled by the presence or absence of '-' before the sort parameter.
filters__idNoQuery string parameter — filter results by Change Order ID
filters__batch_idNoQuery string parameter — filter results by Change Order Batch ID
filters__legacy_package_idNoQuery string parameter — filter results by legacy Change Order Package ID
filters__contract_idNoQuery string parameter — filter results by Contract ID
filters__vendor_idNoQuery string parameter — filter results by Contract Vendor ID
filters__signature_requiredNoQuery string parameter — filter results by signature_required
filters__executedNoQuery string parameter — filter results by executed
filters__statusNoQuery string parameter — filter results by status
filters__updated_atNoQuery string parameter — return item(s) within a specific updated at iso8601 datetime range
pageNoPage number for paginated results (default: 1)
per_pageNoNumber of items per page (default: 100, max: 100)
Behavior3/5

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

Annotations already indicate read-only, non-destructive, and idempotent behavior. The description adds the constraint that the endpoint only supports projects with 1 and 2 tier change order configurations, which is valuable. It also mentions pagination. However, it does not disclose other behavioral aspects like rate limits or data freshness.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness2/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

The description is somewhat verbose and includes redundant information, such as repeating 'Commitments' and including API endpoint details. The confusing sentence about fetching a 'specific Commitment' undermines conciseness and structure. It could be trimmed to focus on essential information.

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?

The description does not explain the return value structure beyond mentioning it is a paginated JSON array of 'Commitments.' Given the tool has 14 parameters and no output schema, the description lacks completeness by not detailing what fields are included or how to interpret the response. This leaves the agent underinformed.

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% coverage with detailed descriptions for all 14 parameters. The description only highlights project_id as required and mentions page/per_page for pagination, which adds minimal value beyond the schema. Baseline 3 is appropriate given high schema coverage.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose4/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description clearly states it returns all Commitment Change Orders for a specified project, using a specific verb and resource. However, it confusingly mentions 'fetch the full details of a specific Commitments by its identifier,' which contradicts the 'all' nature and suggests it might be a single-item endpoint. This reduces clarity slightly.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines3/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

The description provides context that the endpoint only supports 1 and 2 tier change order configurations, which is useful for determining when to use it. However, it does not explicitly mention when to use this tool versus alternatives (e.g., show_commitment_change_order for a single item) or provide explicit usage guidance.

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