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 '[Company Admin/Custom - Configurable Tools]', hinting at potential permission requirements, but does not explicitly state required roles, authentication, or rate limits. The description does not disclose whether this is a read-only operation, what happens on failure, or any side effects. The API path suggests a GET request, implying safe retrieval, but this is not confirmed 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 concise with two sentences, but the first sentence is redundant with the name. The second sentence provides the API endpoint, which is useful but could be structured better. It is front-loaded with the core purpose, but lacks clarity. The bracketed context is helpful but could be integrated more smoothly into the description.

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 a tool with 5 parameters (including pagination for a single-entry retrieval) and no output schema, the description is inadequate. It does not explain the return format, error conditions, or why pagination parameters exist. The lack of annotations means the description should cover behavioral aspects, which it does not. The context '[Company Admin/Custom - Configurable Tools]' is vague and does not fully address permission or scope requirements.

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 (e.g., 'Unique identifier for the Custom Field Definition'). The description adds no additional parameter semantics beyond the schema. However, the baseline is 3 because the schema adequately documents the parameters, and the description does not need to compensate for gaps. The description does not explain relationships between parameters, such as why 'page' and 'per_page' are present for a single-entry retrieval tool.

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 Custom Field Lov Entry' is a tautology that restates the tool name with minimal elaboration. It adds the API endpoint path and a bracketed context '[Company Admin/Custom - Configurable Tools]', but does not clearly explain what the tool does (e.g., retrieve a specific List of Values entry for a custom field). The verb 'Show' is vague compared to more precise alternatives like 'Retrieve' or 'Get'.

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 is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives. The sibling tools list includes many 'list_' and 'show_' operations, but the description does not differentiate this tool from others (e.g., 'list_custom_field_lov_entries' is a sibling). There is no mention of prerequisites, such as needing admin permissions implied by the bracketed context, or when this specific entry retrieval is preferred over listing all entries.

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