Skip to main content
Glama
TylerIlunga

Procore MCP Server

Show Todo

show_todo
Read-onlyIdempotent

Retrieve detailed information about a specific ToDo item in a Procore project using its ID and project ID. Returns full details from the Schedule (Legacy) API.

Instructions

Return detailed information about a ToDo Item in a specified Project. This endpoint has been deprecated. Instead, use [/rest/v1/calendar-items). Use this to fetch the full details of a specific Schedule (Legacy) records by its identifier. Returns a JSON object describing the requested Schedule (Legacy) records. Required parameters: id, project_id. Procore API: Project Management > Schedule (Legacy). Endpoint: GET /rest/v1.0/todos/{id}

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
idYesURL path parameter — unique identifier of the Schedule (Legacy) resource
project_idYesQuery string parameter — unique identifier for the project.
pageNoPage number for paginated results (default: 1)
per_pageNoNumber of items per page (default: 100, max: 100)
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already indicate read-only, non-destructive, and idempotent. Description adds deprecation warning and required parameters, which are beneficial beyond annotations.

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?

Contains some redundant detail like 'Procore API: Project Management > Schedule (Legacy)' and a broken link. Could be more concise.

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?

Covers deprecation and required params, but lacks description of return object structure. Pagination params 'page' and 'per_page' are not explained in description, though they are in schema.

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%, so baseline is 3. Description lists required parameters but does not add any semantic value beyond what the schema provides.

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

Purpose4/5

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

Clearly states it returns details of a ToDo item in a specific project. However, it conflates 'ToDo Item' with 'Schedule (Legacy) records', causing slight ambiguity.

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

Usage Guidelines4/5

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

Explicitly marks tool as deprecated and directs to use calendar-items. Provides clear context for when to use, but lacks explicit 'when not to use' other than the deprecation.

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