shiftbase_list_clocked_inWho is clocked in right now: employee, since when, their scheduled shift, team, department and location. GET /timesheets/clock.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| limit | No | Results per page, 1-200 (default 50). The reply's total and next_offset show what is left. | |
| offset | No | Index of the first result; pass the previous reply's next_offset. |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
readOnlyHint=true already declares the safety profile, and the description adds genuinely new context: this is a live snapshot rather than a historical query, it names the backing endpoint GET /timesheets/clock, and it lists the fields returned. It does not mention pagination behavior, though that is in the schema.
Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.
Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?
A single sentence plus endpoint reference, with the identifying scope ('right now') front-loaded and every clause carrying information about the return payload.
Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.
Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?
There is no output schema, so the description usefully enumerates the returned fields, and annotations cover the read-only safety profile; the only omission is any mention of result-set size or paging, which the schema does handle.
Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.
Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?
Schema description coverage is 100%, so limit and offset are already fully documented with defaults and paging semantics. The description adds no parameter meaning beyond the schema, which is the baseline-3 case.
Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.
Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?
States a precise resource ('clocked-in employees') and a precise temporal scope ('right now'), and enumerates the returned attributes. An agent can distinguish it from shiftbase_list_timesheets or shiftbase_get_timesheet without inspecting schemas.
Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.
Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?
The phrase 'right now' implicitly defines the moment-in-time use case, but the description never states when to prefer this over shiftbase_list_timesheets or shiftbase_get_timesheet, nor any exclusions or prerequisites.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.