Skip to main content
Glama
TylerIlunga

Procore MCP Server

Update Action Plan

update_action_plan

Update an existing action plan by modifying only the supplied fields. Returns the updated plan object.

Instructions

Update Action Plan. Use this to update an existing Action Plans (only the supplied fields are changed). Updates the specified Action Plans and returns the modified object on success. Required parameters: project_id, id. Procore API: Project Management > Action Plans. Endpoint: PATCH /rest/v1.0/projects/{project_id}/action_plans/plans/{id}

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
project_idYesURL path parameter — unique identifier for the project.
idYesURL path parameter — unique identifier of the Action Plans resource
titleNoJSON request body field — title of the Action Plan
descriptionNoJSON request body field — description of the Action Plan
privateNoJSON request body field — privacy flag of the Action Plan
location_idNoJSON request body field — location ID to be set on the Action Plan
manager_idNoJSON request body field — party Person ID of the Action Plan Manager
plan_type_idNoJSON request body field — plan Type ID to be set on the Action Plan
status_idNoJSON request body field — action Plan Status ID to be set on the Action Plan
plan_approvers_attributesNoJSON request body field — plan_approvers_attributes
plan_receivers_attributesNoJSON request body field — plan_receivers_attributes
custom_field_%{custom_field_definition_id}NoJSON request body field — value of the custom field. The data type of the value passed in corresponds with the data_type of the Custom Field Definition. For a lov_entry data_type the value passed in should be the ID of one ...
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already indicate readOnlyHint=false and destructiveHint=false. The description adds that only supplied fields are changed (partial update) and that the modified object is returned. This provides useful behavioral context beyond the annotations. No annotation contradiction.

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

Conciseness5/5

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

The description is very concise (4 sentences) and front-loaded with the core purpose. It includes essential information: partial update, required parameters, and API endpoint. No unnecessary words.

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

Completeness4/5

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

Given the tool's complexity (12 parameters, no output schema), the description covers the core behavioral aspects: partial update, required params, and success response. It does not mention error scenarios or edge cases, but it is sufficient for an agent to understand when and how to invoke the tool.

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?

The input schema has 100% coverage with descriptions for all 12 parameters. The description does not add meaning beyond the schema, only re-stating the required parameters. Baseline for high schema coverage is 3.

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 the tool's purpose: updating an existing Action Plan. It specifies that only supplied fields are changed, and it returns the modified object. This distinguishes it from siblings like create_action_plan and delete_action_plan.

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?

The description indicates when to use the tool ('update an existing Action Plans') and provides required parameters. However, it does not explicitly mention when not to use it or suggest alternatives. The context from sibling names helps, but the description itself lacks exclusion guidance.

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