Clockify MCP Server

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It states the tool finds users based on hours threshold, but doesn't reveal key behaviors: whether it's a read-only operation, what permissions are needed, how results are returned (e.g., list format, pagination), or any rate limits. The description adds minimal context beyond the basic purpose, missing critical operational details for an agent to use it effectively.

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?

The description is appropriately sized with two sentences: the first states the purpose clearly, and the second adds a usage hint. It's front-loaded with the core functionality, and both sentences earn their place by providing purpose and context. However, it could be slightly more structured by explicitly mentioning parameters or alternatives, keeping it efficient but not maximally informative.

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?

Given the complexity of a tool with 3 parameters, no annotations, and no output schema, the description is incomplete. It lacks details on behavioral aspects (e.g., read/write nature, auth needs), output format, and how to interpret results. While the purpose is clear, the absence of annotations and output schema means the description should do more to compensate, which it doesn't, leaving significant gaps for an agent to rely on.

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%, with all three parameters ('hours_threshold', 'weeks', 'workspace_id') well-documented in the schema, including defaults and optionality. The description adds no additional parameter semantics beyond what the schema provides, such as explaining how 'weeks' interacts with the analysis or what 'workspace_id' entails. Given the high schema coverage, the baseline score of 3 is appropriate as the description doesn't compensate but doesn't need to.

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?

The description clearly states the tool's purpose: 'Find users who have not logged at least a specified number of hours per week.' This is a specific verb ('find') and resource ('users') with a clear criterion ('not logged at least a specified number of hours per week'). It distinguishes from some siblings like 'find_overtime_users' by focusing on undertime, but doesn't explicitly differentiate from others like 'find_user_time_entries' or 'get_user_weekly_summary' that might overlap in user analysis.

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 description provides implied usage with 'Useful for identifying team members who may need support,' suggesting it's for monitoring and support scenarios. However, it lacks explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like 'find_overtime_users' for opposite analysis or 'get_user_weekly_summary' for individual summaries. No exclusions or prerequisites are mentioned, leaving gaps in decision-making context.

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