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 of behavioral disclosure. The description only states 'Show Configurable Field Set' and includes a URL path, which implies a read operation but does not specify whether it's safe, requires authentication, has rate limits, or returns paginated data. It mentions pagination parameters in the schema but does not explain their behavior in the description.

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 a single line but is not front-loaded with useful information. It includes redundant elements like the tool name and a URL path that doesn't aid understanding. While concise, it under-specifies the tool's purpose and context, making it inefficient for the agent's needs.

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 the complexity of the tool (retrieving a specific configurable field set with pagination), the description is incomplete. No annotations are provided, and there is no output schema, so the description should explain the return format and behavioral traits. It fails to do so, leaving significant gaps in understanding how the tool behaves and what it returns.

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?

The input schema has 100% description coverage, with clear documentation for each parameter (company_id, id, page, per_page). The description adds no additional parameter semantics beyond what the schema provides. According to the rules, with high schema coverage, the baseline score is 3, which is appropriate here as the description does not compensate but also does not detract.

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 Configurable Field Set' is a tautology that restates the tool name without adding meaningful context. It includes a bracketed category '[Company Admin/Custom - Configurable Tools]' and a URL path, but these do not clarify the specific action or resource. The description lacks a clear verb and does not distinguish this tool from its many siblings, which include various 'show' and 'list' tools.

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 any prerequisites, context, or exclusions. Given the extensive list of sibling tools, the absence of usage guidelines leaves the agent with no direction on selecting this specific tool for retrieving a configurable field set.

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