Skip to main content
Glama
TylerIlunga

Procore MCP Server

Update Timecard Entry (Project)

update_timecard_entry_project

Update a specific timecard entry in Procore by providing the project ID and entry ID. Modify fields such as hours, cost code, or billable status.

Instructions

Update a specific timecard entry. #### See - Daily Log guide - for additional info on * Attachments. Use this to update an existing Field Productivity records (only the supplied fields are changed). Updates the specified Field Productivity records and returns the modified object on success. Required parameters: project_id, id. Procore API: Project Management > Field Productivity. Endpoint: PATCH /rest/v1.0/projects/{project_id}/timecard_entries/{id}

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
project_idYesURL path parameter — unique identifier for the project.
idYesURL path parameter — iD of the timecard entry
hoursNoJSON request body field — total number of hours worked (excluding breaks) for the timecard entry. This property is not applicable if the timesheet time entry is configured for start time and stop time.
lunch_timeNoJSON request body field — the duration of the lunch break, in minutes, for the timecard entry. This property is only applicable if the tmesheet time entry is configured for start time and stop time.
party_idNoJSON request body field — the ID of the Party of the Timecard Entry
time_inNoJSON request body field — the start time of the timecard entry in ISO 8601 format. This property is only applicable if the timesheet time entry is configured for start time and stop time.
time_outNoJSON request body field — the stop time of the timecard entry in ISO 8601 format. This property is only applicable if the timesheet time entry is configured for start time and stop time.
billableNoJSON request body field — the billable status of the timecard entry. Must be either true or false.
dateNoJSON request body field — the date of the timecard dntry in ISO 8601 format.
datetimeNoJSON request body field — the date and time of the record. This property is mutually exclusive with the Date property.
descriptionNoJSON request body field — the description of the timecard entry.
timecard_time_type_idNoJSON request body field — the ID of the timecard time type corresponding to the timecard entry.
cost_code_idNoJSON request body field — the ID of the cost code corresponding to the timecard entry.
login_information_idNoJSON request body field — the ID of the login information corresponding to the timecard entry.
timesheet_idNoJSON request body field — the ID of the timesheet corresponding to the timecard entry.
daily_log_segment_idNoJSON request body field — daily Log Segment ID
clock_in_idNoJSON request body field — the ID of the clock in GPS position corresponding to the timecard entry.
clock_out_idNoJSON request body field — the ID of the clock out GPS position corresponding to the timecard entry.
origin_idNoJSON request body field — the ID of the related external data.
origin_dataNoJSON request body field — the value of the related external data.
line_item_type_idNoJSON request body field — the ID of the line item type pertaining to the time card entry.
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations indicate a write operation (readOnlyHint=false) and non-destructive (destructiveHint=false). The description adds value by clarifying partial update behavior ('only the supplied fields are changed') and the return of the modified object on success, which goes beyond what annotations alone provide.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness3/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

The description is front-loaded with the main action but includes tangential information like a link to the Daily Log guide for attachments. It also repeats 'Field Productivity records' multiple times. Could be more concise without losing essential details.

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

Completeness2/5

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

Given the complexity of 21 parameters and no output schema, the description lacks guidance on parameter usage, such as mutual exclusivity between date and datetime fields (hinted in schema but not described). It also does not cover error scenarios or validation rules, making it incomplete for an agent to use correctly without additional context.

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

Parameters3/5

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

The input schema has 100% description coverage for all 21 parameters. The description only reiterates required parameters (project_id, id) from the schema, adding no additional semantic meaning or clarification on parameter relationships or constraints.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose4/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description clearly states 'Update a specific timecard entry' and 'Updates the specified Field Productivity records', with required parameters noted. However, the term 'Field Productivity records' may cause slight confusion as the tool is for timecard entries. It differentiates from sibling tools like create/delete/bulk update by specifying a single entry update per project.

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

Usage Guidelines2/5

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

The description says 'Use this to update an existing Field Productivity records (only the supplied fields are changed)' implying partial update, but lacks explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like bulk_update_timecard_entries or create_timecard_entry_project. No when-not-to-use or prerequisites are provided.

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