Skip to main content
Glama
TylerIlunga

Procore MCP Server

Show Near Miss

show_near_miss
Read-onlyIdempotent

Retrieve full details of a specific near miss incident by providing the project and incident identifiers.

Instructions

Returns specific Near Miss. Use this to fetch the full details of a specific Incidents by its identifier. Returns a JSON object describing the requested Incidents. Required parameters: project_id, id. Procore API: Project Management > Incidents. Endpoint: GET /rest/v1.0/projects/{project_id}/incidents/near_misses/{id}

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
project_idYesURL path parameter — unique identifier for the project.
idYesURL path parameter — unique identifier of the Incidents resource
incident_idNoQuery string parameter — unique identifier of the incident
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 indicate read-only and idempotent. Description adds it returns a JSON object, but no extra behavioral details (e.g., error handling, response structure). With annotations, minimal extra value.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness4/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

Four sentences, no fluff, includes API reference. Slightly redundant with schema but efficient overall.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness3/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

No output schema, description gives generic 'JSON object describing the requested Incidents.' Lacks details on errors or expected format, but adequate for a simple read operation.

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 parameter descriptions. Description only redundantly lists required params and endpoint path, adding minimal meaning beyond schema.

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

Purpose5/5

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

The description clearly states it returns a specific Near Miss by identifier, distinguishing it from list or crud operations. It says 'Returns specific Near Miss' and 'fetch the full details of a specific Incidents by its identifier.'

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

Usage Guidelines3/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

The description says 'Use this to fetch...' but does not explicitly exclude when to use alternatives like list_near_misses. It implies usage context but lacks explicit when-not or alternatives.

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