Skip to main content
Glama
TylerIlunga

Procore MCP Server

Updates A Defect Resource.

updates_a_defect_resource
Idempotent

Update a defect's header fields, including title, notes, and status, to progress it through workflow states. Send only the fields to change; omitted fields keep current values.

Instructions

Updates header fields on a defect document such as title, notes, and status. Use status transitions to move the defect through its workflow states. Send only the fields you intend to change; omitted fields keep their current values. company_id and project_id default to the values set by procore_set_config when omitted, and id must identify an existing parent record — resolve it with the matching list tool first. Returns the modified defect resource 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, company_id, project_id. Procore API (v2.0): Resource Management > Materials Management. Endpoint: PATCH /rest/v2.0/companies/{company_id}/projects/{project_id}/materials_mgmt/defects/{id}

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
idYesURL path parameter — the ID of the defect
nameNoJSON request body field — name of the document header.
notesNoJSON request body field — notes associated with the document header.
company_idYesURL path parameter — the company identifier
project_idYesURL path parameter — the project identifier
descriptionNoJSON request body field — description of the document header.
properties_to_addNoJSON request body field — collection of resource parameters to add to the document header.
properties_to_deleteNoJSON request body field — collection of resource parameters to delete from the document header.
properties_to_updateNoJSON request body field — collection of resource parameters to update in the document header.
Behavior5/5

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

Annotations already indicate write (readOnly=false), idempotent, and non-destructive behavior. The description adds rich context beyond annotations: partial-update PATCH semantics, config defaults for company/project, the need to resolve an existing parent record, return payload, and common HTTP error codes (401, 403, 404).

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

Conciseness4/5

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

The description is front-loaded with purpose, then covers usage guidelines, defaults, error handling, required parameters, and endpoint. Every sentence adds value, though the trailing endpoint info and repetition of required parameters make it slightly longer than necessary.

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 (9 parameters, PATCH endpoint, no output schema), the description is complete: it covers what is updated, partial-update behavior, prerequisites, response, failure modes, and API endpoint. No critical operational aspect is left undocumented.

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% and each parameter has a basic description. The description adds meaningful semantics: distinguishes URL path parameters from JSON body fields, explains partial-update behavior (omitted fields unchanged), and clarifies defaults for company_id and project_id. However, the description's mention of 'title' and 'status' does not exactly match schema field names (name, notes, description), which could cause slight ambiguity.

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 uses the specific verb 'Updates' and clearly identifies the resource as 'header fields on a defect document,' with examples like title, notes, and status. This distinguishes it from sibling tools that update defect line items, attachments, or comments.

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 provides practical guidance: send only fields to change, omitted fields keep current values, company_id/project_id default from config, and resolve id with the matching list tool first. It also mentions using status transitions for workflow states, though it does not explicitly name alternative defect update tools for line items or attachments.

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