Skip to main content
Glama
TylerIlunga

Procore MCP Server

Show Checklist Signature Request

show_checklist_signature_request
Read-onlyIdempotent

Retrieve full details of a specific signature request for a checklist in a Procore project.

Instructions

Retrieves Signature Request for a specified Checklist. Use this to fetch the full details of a specific Inspections by its identifier. Returns a JSON object describing the requested Inspections. Required parameters: project_id, list_id, id. Procore API: Project Management > Inspections. Endpoint: GET /rest/v1.0/checklist/lists/{list_id}/signature_requests/{id}

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
list_idYesURL path parameter — unique identifier of the list
idYesURL path parameter — signature Request ID
project_idYesQuery string parameter — unique identifier for the project.
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 declare readOnlyHint and idempotentHint. Description adds that it is a GET request (from endpoint) and returns JSON, which is mildly helpful but not substantial. No contradictions.

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?

Description is relatively concise but contains redundancy ('Use this to fetch...' and later 'Returns a JSON object...') and an inaccurate mention of 'Inspections'. Structure is functional but not optimal.

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?

No output schema is provided, yet the description only vaguely states 'Returns a JSON object describing the requested Inspections' without specifying the structure or fields. This is insufficient for a read 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?

Schema coverage is 100% with descriptions for all 5 parameters. Description only lists required parameters but adds no further meaning beyond the schema. Baseline score of 3 is appropriate.

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?

Description clearly states it retrieves a signature request for a checklist. However, the second sentence 'fetch the full details of a specific Inspections' is misleading and conflates inspections with signature requests, slightly reducing clarity.

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 on when to use this tool versus alternatives. Siblings include create, delete, and show_a_inspection_item_signature_request, but no comparison or exclusion criteria provided.

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