Skip to main content
Glama
TylerIlunga

Procore MCP Server

Update Checklist (Deprecated)

update_checklist
Idempotent

Updates an existing inspection checklist in a Procore project. Send only the fields you intend to change; omitted fields retain their current values. Returns the modified checklist.

Instructions

Updates Inspection Checklist in a specified Project. DEPRECATED: Procore has deprecated this endpoint (as of 2022-01-26). It may be removed without further notice; prefer a newer version of this resource where one exists, and use procore_search_endpoints to find it. Send only the fields you intend to change; omitted fields keep their current values. id must identify an existing parent record — resolve it with the matching list tool first. Returns the modified checklist on success. Failures come back as an error payload carrying the HTTP status — commonly 401 when the token has expired, 403 without tool permission, and 404 when an id does not resolve. Required parameters: id, project_id, list. Procore API: Project Management > Inspections. Endpoint: PATCH /rest/v1.0/checklist/lists/{id}

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
idYesURL path parameter — unique identifier of the Inspections resource
listYesJSON request body field — checklist object
project_idYesJSON request body field — the ID of the Project
attachmentsNoJSON request body field — checklist's Attachments. To upload attachments you must upload the entire payload as `multipart/form-data` content-type and specify each parameter as form-data together with `attachments[]` as files.
run_configurable_validationsNoQuery string parameter — if true, validations are run for the corresponding Configurable Field Set.
Behavior5/5

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

Beyond the annotations, the description discloses PATCH semantics (partial update: 'Send only the fields you intend to change; omitted fields keep their current values'), the return value, and failure modes with HTTP status codes (401, 403, 404). This is rich behavioral context that significantly aids an agent in anticipating outcomes.

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?

Although the description is lengthy, every sentence provides critical information: deprecation, alternative discovery, partial-update semantics, id resolution, return value, error codes, required parameters, and endpoint location. The most essential purpose statement is front-loaded, and no words are wasted.

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

Completeness5/5

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

Given the tool's complexity (5 parameters, nested objects, no output schema), the description fully compensates by describing the return value, error conditions, required parameters, deprecation status, and endpoint. It leaves the agent well-equipped to invoke the tool successfully despite the lack of an output schema.

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

Parameters4/5

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

With 100% schema description coverage, the baseline for this dimension is 3, but the description adds meaning: it clarifies that 'id must identify an existing parent record' and explains partial-update behavior for the parameters, which helps the agent understand how to construct the request beyond the raw schema.

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 'Updates Inspection Checklist in a specified Project' with a specific verb and resource, distinguishing it from sibling tools like create_checklist or update_checklist_inspection. Including the endpoint path 'PATCH /rest/v1.0/checklist/lists/{id}' and the deprecation notice further clarifies exactly which operation this tool performs.

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

Usage Guidelines5/5

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

The description explicitly advises against using this deprecated tool and directs users to 'use procore_search_endpoints to find it' for a newer version. It also sets a prerequisite: resolve the id with the matching list tool first. This is strong when-to-use and when-not-to-use 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