Procore MCP Server

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 'GET' which implies read-only, but doesn't disclose authentication needs, rate limits, error conditions, or what happens if parameters are invalid. The description adds minimal behavioral context beyond the 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 and front-loaded with the core purpose. The bracketed context and endpoint reference add some clutter but don't significantly impact readability. It could be more polished but avoids unnecessary verbosity.

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?

For a tool with 5 parameters (3 required) and no annotations or output schema, the description is inadequate. It doesn't explain what a change order request is, what data is returned, or handle the complexity of multiple identifiers. The agent would struggle to use this effectively without external knowledge.

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%, so parameters are documented in the schema. The description adds no additional parameter semantics beyond what's in the schema (like explaining relationships between id, project_id, and contract_id). Baseline 3 is appropriate when 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 states the tool shows a change order request, which is a clear verb+resource combination. However, it doesn't distinguish from sibling tools (like 'show_change_order_package' or 'show_change_event') and the bracketed context '[Construction Financials/Change Orders]' is somewhat vague about scope.

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. The description mentions it's a GET endpoint but doesn't specify prerequisites, when this retrieval is appropriate, or what distinguishes it from other 'show' or 'list' tools in the sibling list.

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