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 states 'Update Change Order Package' which implies a mutation, but does not disclose behavioral traits like required permissions, whether it's idempotent, side effects, or error handling. The HTTP method 'PATCH' hints at partial updates, but this is insufficient for a mutation tool with zero annotation coverage.

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 and front-loaded with the core action. It includes the domain context and HTTP method efficiently. However, the inclusion of the API endpoint 'PATCH /rest/v1.0/change_order_packages/{id}' is somewhat redundant for an AI agent but not wasteful.

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 tool is a mutation (update) with no annotations, no output schema, and 4 parameters (including a nested object), the description is incomplete. It lacks information on what the update entails, expected response, error conditions, or how the 'change_order' object should be structured. For a complex update tool, this is inadequate.

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 schema (e.g., 'id', 'project_id', 'change_order'). The description adds no additional parameter semantics beyond the schema. According to rules, with high schema coverage, the baseline is 3 even without param info in the description.

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 updates a Change Order Package, which is a specific verb and resource. However, it does not differentiate from sibling tools like 'update_change_event' or 'update_change_order_request', and the domain context '[Construction Financials/Change Orders]' is helpful but not fully distinguishing. It's clear but lacks sibling differentiation.

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?

The description provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It mentions the domain context but does not specify prerequisites, exclusions, or related tools. Without usage instructions, the agent must infer context from the tool name alone.

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