Skip to main content
Glama
TylerIlunga

Procore MCP Server

Update Image

update_image
Idempotent

Update an existing image in a Procore project by sending only the fields to change. Provide image ID and project ID to apply changes and retrieve the updated image.

Instructions

Update an existing Image in a Project. Send only the fields you intend to change; omitted fields keep their current values. Pass the record's fields as top-level arguments — they are nested under "image" in the request payload for you. id must identify an existing parent record — resolve it with the matching list tool first. Returns the modified image 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. Procore API: Project Management > Photos. Endpoint: PATCH /rest/v1.0/images/{id}

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
idYesURL path parameter — unique identifier of the Photos resource
privateNoJSON request body field — the Private status of the Image. Defaults to a project configuration.
log_dateNoJSON request body field — the log date in YYYY-MM-DD format
trade_idsNoJSON request body field — an array of IDs of the Trades of the Image
project_idYesQuery string parameter — unique identifier for the project.
descriptionNoJSON request body field — image description
location_idNoJSON request body field — if you want to use an existing location and you have the ID of that existing location use this. `location_id` takes precedence over `mt_location`
mt_locationNoJSON request body field — use this for creating a new multi-tier or single-tier Location. This will be ignored if `location_id` is provided.
image_category_idNoJSON request body field — image Category ID to move the Image to
daily_log_segment_idNoJSON request body field — daily Log Segment ID
Behavior5/5

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

The description goes far beyond annotations by explaining partial-update semantics, payload nesting, the return value, and common HTTP error statuses (401/403/404). It adds rich behavioral context without contradicting the provided annotations.

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 a well-structured paragraph where each sentence contributes unique value: purpose, partial update behavior, payload handling, id resolution, return value, errors, required parameters, and API reference. No filler or redundancy.

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?

For a 10-parameter tool with no output schema, the description covers all key aspects: how to modify, how to supply fields, how to identify the record, what success returns, and what common failures look like. Combined with the detailed schema, the agent has sufficient information to call it correctly.

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?

Schema coverage is 100%, so the baseline is 3, but the description adds crucial meaning: id must be resolved with a list tool, and fields are passed as top-level arguments despite being nested in the actual payload. This reduces the risk of incorrect invocation.

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 opens with 'Update an existing Image in a Project', clearly stating the verb, resource, and context. This distinguishes it from sibling tools like create_image, show_image, and delete_image.

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?

It explains to send only changed fields and keep omitted ones, and instructs to resolve the id via the matching list tool first. This provides concrete usage context and a prerequisite step, though it does not explicitly name alternative tools or exclusion cases.

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