harvest-forecast-mcp

all_projects_schedule

Get a scheduling overview for all projects, showing assignments, assigned people, and milestones within a date range.

Instructions

Get a scheduling overview for all projects: assignments, assigned people, and milestones.

Combines Forecast assignments, people, and milestones into a per-project
view showing who is working on what during the date range.

Args:
    start_date: Start of date range (YYYY-MM-DD).
    end_date: End of date range (YYYY-MM-DD).

Tool call template

Replace each placeholder with a value matching the input schema. Only required parameters are included; add optional parameters as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {
      "start_date": "<start_date>",
      "end_date": "<end_date>"
    },
    "name": "all_projects_schedule"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`end_date`	Yes
`start_date`	Yes

Output Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`result`	Yes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv0.1.0Jul 11, 2026

TDQS

A3.8/5.0

Behavior3/5

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

No annotations provided, so description bears full burden. Mentions combining data sources but lacks disclosure on performance, pagination, or rate limits. Adequate but not detailed.

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 concise paragraphs with front-loaded purpose. No wasted words. Clearly structured with args listed.

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?

With output schema present, return values need not be explained. Description covers what the tool does (per-project view with assignments, people, milestones) and requires only date range. Complete for its complexity.

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 0%, but description adds format (YYYY-MM-DD) and purpose for both parameters. Adds meaning beyond the schema.

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?

Clearly states it gets a scheduling overview for all projects, combining assignments, people, and milestones. Distinguishes from sibling tools that focus on single entities, though could be more explicit about the difference from 'project_overview'.

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

Usage Guidelines3/5

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

Implies usage for viewing all-project schedules within a date range, but does not explicitly state when to use this tool vs alternatives like 'person_schedule' or 'project_overview'.

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