Skip to main content
Glama

Timix.AI

by ai.timix

update_time_report

Update fields on one of your own time entries (PATCH — only the fields you supply are changed; everything else is left as-is). Supply the time_report_id plus any combination of date, start_time, hours, and text.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
dateNoNew date (ISO 8601 YYYY-MM-DD).
textNoNew description (max 1000 characters).
hoursNoNew duration in hours (> 0 and ≤ 24).
start_timeNoNew start time in 24-h HH:mm.
time_report_idYesId of the time entry to update.
idempotency_keyNoOptional caller-supplied key; retrying with the same key returns the original result instead of acting twice.

TDQS

A3.9/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

Discloses PATCH semantics (only supplied fields change) and mentions the idempotency key behavior. No annotations are provided, so the description carries the burden; it lacks details on permissions, error handling, or return value.

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?

Two sentences, no fluff. Front-loaded with the key PATCH concept, immediately followed by usage syntax.

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

Completeness3/5

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

Covers the core update operation but does not describe the response format or error scenarios. Given no output schema, more detail on return values would improve completeness.

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?

Schema coverage is 100%, so the schema already describes each parameter. The description adds context about the idempotency key and partial update behavior but mostly restates the parameter list.

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?

Clearly states the action ('Update fields'), resource ('time entries'), and scope ('your own'). Differentiates from related tools by specifying PATCH behavior.

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?

Tells the user to supply time_report_id plus any combination of updateable fields, implying which parameters are required vs optional. However, does not explicitly guide when to use this tool versus siblings like bulk_update_time_reports.

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

All Timix.AI toolsInspect
Try in Browser
RayrunBuild, deploy, and operate MCP servers without becoming an infrastructure team.ray.runAd

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

TDQS

B3/5.0
Disambiguation2/5

Multiple tools have overlapping purposes, e.g., create_time_report and log_time both create a single time entry with near-identical descriptions. There are also many similar getter/list tools that blur together, making it hard for an agent to select the right one.

Naming Consistency2/5

Most tool names use snake_case, but verbs are inconsistent: 'list' vs 'get' for similar operations, 'manage' combines create/update/delete, and 'use_favorite' is an outlier. This pattern reduces predictability.

Tool Count1/5

With 114 tools, the set is extremely large and far beyond a well-scoped server (typical 3-15). This overwhelms agents and suggests many tools could be consolidated or removed.

Completeness3/5

The tool surface covers a broad domain including customers, projects, tasks, time tracking, invoicing, and user management, but there are gaps like no list_users or direct user listing, and some operations seem redundant rather than filling missing functionality.

Resources