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 implies a read operation ('Show' and 'GET'), but does not disclose behavioral traits like authentication requirements, rate limits, error conditions, or response format. The HTTP method is noted, but no additional operational context is given.

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 concise with two parts: a tautological title and an HTTP endpoint. It is front-loaded but under-specified, lacking essential explanatory content. While not verbose, it fails to convey necessary information efficiently.

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 and no output schema, the description is incomplete. It does not explain what a 'Company Segment Item' is, what data is returned, or how to interpret results. For a tool with 6 parameters and complex sibling relationships, this minimal description is inadequate.

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 the schema fully documents all 6 parameters. The description adds no parameter semantics beyond what the schema provides, such as explaining relationships between IDs or pagination behavior. However, with high schema coverage, the baseline is 3.

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 Company Segment Item' is a tautology that restates the tool name without adding clarity. It includes a bracketed context hint '[Construction Financials/Work Breakdown Structure]' and the HTTP endpoint, but does not specify what action is performed (e.g., retrieve, display) or what resource is accessed beyond the name. It fails to distinguish from sibling tools like 'list_company_segment_items' or 'show_company_wbs_segment'.

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?

The description provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It does not mention prerequisites, related tools, or contextual usage scenarios. Given the sibling tools include list and show variants, the absence of differentiation is a significant gap.

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