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 'GET' and includes pagination parameters (page, per_page), implying read-only behavior and paginated results. However, it does not explicitly state safety (e.g., non-destructive), authentication needs, rate limits, or error conditions. The description adds minimal behavioral context beyond the HTTP method.

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: one stating the purpose and another providing the API endpoint. It is front-loaded with the core function. However, the second sentence is technical and could be integrated more smoothly, but it does not waste space.

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 'show' returns (e.g., template details, status) or behavioral aspects like pagination defaults or error handling. For a tool with 4 parameters and no structured output information, the description lacks necessary context for effective use.

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 parameters (id, company_id, page, per_page). The description adds no additional parameter semantics beyond what the schema provides. It includes the API endpoint path which implies parameter usage but does not explain semantics. Baseline 3 is appropriate given high schema coverage.

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 states the tool's purpose as 'Show Recycled Company Form Template', which is a clear verb+resource combination. However, it does not differentiate from sibling tools (e.g., other 'show_recycled_*' tools) or specify what 'show' entails (e.g., retrieve details vs. list). The inclusion of the API endpoint adds technical context but does not enhance purpose clarity.

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 description lacks context about its role relative to sibling tools (e.g., other recycled item retrieval tools) or prerequisites. It does not mention when-not-to-use scenarios or refer to related tools for non-recycled templates.

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