Procore MCP Server

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 mentions 'GET' in the URL, implying a read-only operation, but doesn't explicitly state safety, permissions, rate limits, or what data is returned. The description adds minimal behavioral context beyond the implied HTTP method.

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

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

The description is brief but not optimally structured. It front-loads the purpose but includes a URL that may be redundant. The bracketed category adds noise. It's concise but could be more polished for clarity.

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

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

Given no annotations, no output schema, and a tool with 4 parameters, the description is inadequate. It doesn't explain what a 'Bid Package' is, what data is returned, or any behavioral traits. For a read operation, more context is needed to guide the agent effectively.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema description coverage is 100%, with clear parameter descriptions in the schema. The description adds no parameter semantics beyond what's in the schema—it doesn't explain relationships between project_id and id, or how pagination works. Baseline 3 is appropriate since the schema does the heavy lifting.

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

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

The description 'Show Bid Package' states the verb and resource, but it's vague—it doesn't specify what 'show' entails (e.g., retrieve details, list contents). The bracketed '[Preconstruction/Bid Management]' adds some context, but it's not a clear, specific purpose. It distinguishes from siblings by naming the resource, but lacks precision.

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

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

No guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives is provided. The description includes a URL path, but this is technical detail, not usage context. There's no mention of prerequisites, related tools, or scenarios for invocation.

Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.