Skip to main content
Glama
TylerIlunga

Procore MCP Server

show_delivery_log

Retrieve delivery log details for a specific project in Procore to track and manage daily project documentation and activities.

Instructions

Show Delivery Log. [Project Management/Daily Log] GET /rest/v1.0/projects/{project_id}/delivery_logs/{id}

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
project_idYesUnique identifier for the project.
idYesDelivery Log ID
pageNoPage number for pagination
per_pageNoItems per page (max 100)
Behavior2/5

Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?

No annotations are provided, so the description must fully disclose behavioral traits. It states 'Show Delivery Log' and includes a GET endpoint, implying a read-only operation, but doesn't explicitly confirm safety (e.g., non-destructive), discuss authentication needs, rate limits, or error handling. The endpoint suggests it retrieves a single log by ID, but the description lacks details on response format, pagination (though parameters include page/per_page), or any side effects. This leaves significant gaps in behavioral understanding.

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?

The description is concise with three elements: a tautological phrase, a category in brackets, and an endpoint. However, it's not front-loaded with useful information—the key details (like it being a GET request) are buried. While brief, it wastes space on repetition and lacks structured guidance, making it minimally adequate but not efficient.

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?

Given the tool's complexity (4 parameters, no annotations, no output schema), the description is incomplete. It fails to explain what a delivery log is, what data it returns, or how pagination works despite parameters for it. Without annotations or output schema, the description should compensate by detailing behavior and output, but it does not, leaving the agent underinformed for a tool that likely returns structured data.

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 description coverage is 100%, with clear descriptions for parameters: project_id ('Unique identifier for the project'), id ('Delivery Log ID'), page ('Page number for pagination'), and per_page ('Items per page (max 100)'). The description adds no additional parameter semantics beyond the schema. Since the schema is comprehensive, the baseline score of 3 is appropriate, as the description doesn't compensate but also doesn't detract.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose2/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description 'Show Delivery Log' is a tautology that restates the tool name without adding clarity. It includes a category '[Project Management/Daily Log]' and an endpoint 'GET /rest/v1.0/projects/{project_id}/delivery_logs/{id}', which hints at retrieving a specific delivery log by ID within a project, but the purpose remains vague—it doesn't specify what a 'delivery log' is or what information it contains. This lacks the specificity needed to distinguish it from sibling tools like 'list_delivery_logs' or 'create_delivery_log'.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines1/5

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 doesn't mention prerequisites (e.g., needing a project ID and delivery log ID), compare it to sibling tools (e.g., 'list_delivery_logs' for multiple logs or 'create_delivery_log' for creation), or indicate any constraints. This absence leaves the agent without direction on appropriate usage scenarios.

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