Timix.AI

update_user_preferences

Update your own UI preferences: default time-entry view, sub-views, theme, and time format. Only the fields you provide are changed (PATCH semantics). Applies to your account globally across all organizations. The user is fixed by your context — you can only change your own preferences.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description
`time_format`	No	Clock format. One of: 12h, 24h.
`idempotency_key`	No	Optional caller-supplied key; retrying with the same key returns the original result instead of acting twice.
`theme_preference`	No	UI theme preference. One of: light, dark, system.
`default_day_sub_view`	No	Default sub-view for the day view. One of: timeline, list, stats, table.
`default_week_sub_view`	No	Default sub-view for the week view. One of: calendar, list, timeline.
`default_month_sub_view`	No	Default sub-view for the month view. One of: calendar, list, timeline.
`default_time_entry_view`	No	Default time-entry view. One of: day, week, month.

TDQS

A4.2/5.0

Behavior3/5

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

No annotations provided. The description discloses PATCH behavior, global scope, and user-fixed context. However, it does not mention idempotency (despite idempotency_key being in schema) or error handling. It adequately describes safety (non-destructive) but lacks full behavioral details.

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 two sentences long, front-loaded with purpose, and every sentence adds unique information. No fluff, perfectly concise.

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

Completeness4/5

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

Given no output schema and moderate parameter count (7 optional), the description covers the key aspects: what it does, scope, and semantics. Missing return value or error details are acceptable for a preference update tool. Could mention that unchanged fields persist, but not critical.

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% with good enum descriptions. The description adds value by clarifying PATCH semantics ('Only the fields you provide are changed'), which is not in the schema. It also groups parameters by category (view preferences, theme, time format).

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 clearly states the verb 'Update' and the resource 'your own UI preferences', listing specific fields (time-entry view, sub-views, theme, time format). This distinguishes it from sibling tools like update_user_profile and update_org_settings, which handle different aspects.

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?

The description explicitly states context: 'only change your own preferences', 'applies to your account globally across all organizations', and PATCH semantics. It implicitly excludes changing others' preferences, but does not mention alternative tools for profile or org settings.

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

All Timix.AI tools Inspect

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

Need Help?