Procore MCP Server

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden. It states 'Update drawing discipline' but doesn't disclose behavioral traits like required permissions, whether it's idempotent, side effects, or error handling. The PATCH method hint suggests partial updates, but this isn't explicitly clarified.

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 an API endpoint hint which is somewhat redundant but not wasteful. However, it lacks complete sentences or structured 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?

For a mutation tool with no annotations and no output schema, the description is inadequate. It doesn't explain what 'update' means, what fields can be changed, or what the response contains. The API endpoint hint doesn't compensate for missing behavioral and output context.

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. The description adds no additional parameter semantics beyond the schema, so it meets the baseline score of 3 for high schema 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 states the verb ('Update') and resource ('drawing discipline'), but it's vague about what 'update' entails—does it modify name, settings, or other fields? It doesn't distinguish from sibling tools like 'update_drawing_discipline_v1_1' or 'update_drawing_discipline_project', leaving ambiguity.

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 on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It mentions '[Project Management/Drawings]' and a PATCH endpoint, but doesn't specify prerequisites, constraints, or differentiate from similar update tools in the sibling list.

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