Skip to main content
Glama
TylerIlunga

Procore MCP Server

Update A Coordination Issue (REST V2.0)

update_a_coordination_issue_rest_v2_0

Modify specific attributes of a coordination issue in Procore. Provide company, project, and issue ID; only supplied fields like title, assignee, or due date are updated.

Instructions

JSON body must include a coordination_issue object with attributes to update (CoordinationIssues::Public::UpdateService). bim_file_id is mapped to the internal file association. Use this to update an existing Coordination Issues (only the supplied fields are changed). Updates the specified Coordination Issues and returns the modified object on success. Required parameters: company_id, project_id, id. Procore API (v2.0): Project Management > Coordination Issues. Endpoint: PATCH /rest/v2.0/companies/{company_id}/projects/{project_id}/coordination_issues/{id}

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
company_idNoJSON request body field — unique identifier for the Procore company
project_idNoJSON request body field — unique identifier for the Procore project
idYesURL path parameter — coordination Issue ID (numeric)
titleNoJSON request body field — the title for this Coordination Issues operation
descriptionNoJSON request body field — the description for this Coordination Issues operation
creation_sourceNoJSON request body field — the creation source for this Coordination Issues operation
location_idNoJSON request body field — unique identifier of the location
assignee_idNoJSON request body field — unique identifier of the assignee
bim_file_idNoJSON request body field — unique identifier of the bim file
bim_model_idNoJSON request body field — unique identifier of the bim model
due_dateNoJSON request body field — due date in YYYY-MM-DD format
issue_typeNoJSON request body field — the issue type for this Coordination Issues operation
priorityNoJSON request body field — the priority for this Coordination Issues operation
trade_idNoJSON request body field — unique identifier of the trade
attachment_upload_uuidsNoJSON request body field — additional uploads to attach (same pipeline as create).
originNoJSON request body field — optional origin metadata stored with the issue when created or updated.
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations indicate readOnlyHint=false, destructiveHint=false. The description adds that only supplied fields are changed (partial update) and returns the modified object, which goes beyond annotations. No contradiction.

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?

The description is two sentences long with no fluff. It includes the endpoint and service name, which is helpful but slightly redundant. Could be slightly more streamlined.

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?

With 16 parameters and no output schema, the description should clarify the response format. It only says 'returns the modified object' without details. It also doesn't list constraints on updatable fields or dependencies. Inaccurate required parameter list further harms completeness.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters2/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema coverage is 100%, so baseline is 3. However, the description inaccurately lists company_id and project_id as required when schema only requires id. It also mentions a 'coordination_issue' wrapper object not reflected in schema. These inaccuracies reduce clarity.

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?

The description clearly states the tool updates an existing Coordination Issue and specifies the endpoint. It distinguishes from create tool by saying 'update an existing', but doesn't explicitly differentiate from other update versions or siblings.

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 update an existing Coordination Issues', implying when to use it, but doesn't provide when-not-to-use or alternatives. It lists required parameters but no context on prerequisites or error cases.

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