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 of behavioral disclosure. It states 'Update BIM File' which implies a mutation operation, but does not disclose any behavioral traits such as required permissions, whether the update is partial or full, side effects, or response format. The endpoint path 'PATCH' hints at partial updates, but this is not explicitly explained in the description.

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 only one sentence and the endpoint path, avoiding unnecessary verbosity. However, it is under-specified rather than efficiently informative—it lacks essential usage context. The structure is front-loaded with the core action but fails to provide complete guidance.

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 the complexity of a mutation tool with no annotations and no output schema, the description is incomplete. It does not explain what the tool returns, error conditions, or behavioral constraints. The endpoint path offers some technical context, but overall, the description is inadequate for safe and effective use by an AI agent.

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%, with clear parameter descriptions in the input schema (e.g., 'BIM File ID', 'Unique identifier for the project.', 'BIM File Item object'). The description adds no additional parameter semantics beyond what the schema provides, but the schema adequately documents the parameters, meeting the baseline score of 3 for high 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 'Update BIM File' is a tautology that restates the tool name without adding clarity. It lacks a specific verb-resource combination and does not distinguish this tool from sibling tools like 'update_bim_level' or 'update_bim_model'. The bracketed '[Preconstruction/BIM]' and endpoint path provide technical context but do not clarify the tool's purpose beyond the name.

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 does not mention prerequisites, context, or exclusions, leaving the agent without direction on appropriate usage scenarios. Sibling tools include many update operations, but no differentiation is offered.

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