Skip to main content
Glama
TylerIlunga

Procore MCP Server

Show An Project Equipment Log (Deprecated)

show_an_project_equipment_log
Read-onlyIdempotent

Retrieve detailed information about a specific equipment log for a project. Use when you need the full field set for a known log ID.

Instructions

Return detailed information about a specific equipment log. DEPRECATED: Procore has deprecated this endpoint (as of 2024-12-01). It is scheduled for removal on 2025-12-02; prefer a newer version of this resource where one exists, and use procore_search_endpoints to find it. Use this when you already know which project equipment log you want and need its full field set. project_id defaults to the value set by procore_set_config when omitted, and id must identify an existing parent record — resolve it with the matching list tool first. Returns a single JSON object describing the project equipment log. Read-only — it changes nothing in Procore. Failures come back as an error payload carrying the HTTP status — commonly 401 when the token has expired, 403 without tool permission, and 404 when an id does not resolve. Required parameters: project_id, id. Procore API: Project Management > Field Productivity. Endpoint: GET /rest/v1.0/projects/{project_id}/managed_equipment_logs/{id}

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
idYesURL path parameter — iD of the company to get the logs for
project_idYesURL path parameter — unique identifier for the project.
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and destructiveHint=false, so the description's 'Read-only — it changes nothing in Procore' is redundant. However, it adds valuable detail beyond annotations: the deprecation timeline (deprecated as of 2024-12-01, removal on 2025-12-02) and specific failure modes (401 for expired token, 403 for missing permission, 404 for unresolved id). This gives the agent practical expectations for side effects and error handling.

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 dense but front-loaded with the purpose statement. Each sentence adds value: deprecation warning, usage guidance, default behavior, return type, error scenarios, API category, and endpoint. There is some redundancy ('Required parameters: project_id, id' duplicates schema, 'Read-only' duplicates annotation), but the overall length is justified for a deprecated tool that needs to steer agents to alternatives.

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

Completeness4/5

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

The description covers the essential context for a simple show-by-id operation: purpose, deprecation status, parameter default, error semantics, return shape ('a single JSON object'), and endpoint. It lacks detail about the fields in the returned object, but no output schema is provided, so this is a minor gap. The unclear 'parent record' phrasing and the required-vs-default contradiction are the main completeness issues.

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 coverage is 100%, so the schema already documents both parameters, setting the baseline at 3. The description adds some useful context: 'project_id defaults to the value set by procore_set_config when omitted' and 'id must identify an existing parent record — resolve it with the matching list tool first.' However, the default behavior contradicts the 'Required parameters: project_id' statement and schema requirement, and the phrase 'parent record' is vague and potentially confusing. This prevents a higher score.

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

Purpose5/5

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

The description opens with a specific verb+resource: 'Return detailed information about a specific equipment log.' It further clarifies by stating 'Returns a single JSON object describing the project equipment log' and includes the exact endpoint. This clearly distinguishes it from list tools like list_project_equipment_logs, which would be used to find logs, not retrieve one.

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

Usage Guidelines5/5

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

It explicitly states when to use: 'Use this when you already know which project equipment log you want and need its full field set.' It also provides strong guidance for the deprecated status: 'prefer a newer version of this resource where one exists, and use procore_search_endpoints to find it.' Additionally, it tells the agent to 'resolve it with the matching list tool first' for the id, offering a clear alternative workflow.

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