kimai-mcp-server

Get Kimai Project

kimai_get_project

Read-onlyIdempotent

Fetch details of a specific Kimai project by its ID. Use this read-only tool to get project information for reference or display.

Instructions

Read one Kimai project from /api/projects/. This tool is read-only.

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": {
      "id": "<id>"
    },
    "name": "kimai_get_project"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`id`	Yes	Kimai entity ID.
`response_format`	No	Output format: markdown for human-readable summaries, json for structured output.	markdown

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv0.1.0Jul 29, 2026

TDQS

A4/5.0

Behavior3/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and destructiveHint=false, so the description's 'read-only' adds no new behavioral insight. It does add the endpoint path, but this is minor. The description does not contradict annotations.

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, front-loaded with the main action and endpoint. No unnecessary words. Every sentence earns its place.

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 the simple read-only nature and rich annotations, the description covers most needs. It lacks details on return values or error cases, but these are less critical for a straightforward GET endpoint.

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 description does not need to add parameter details. However, it provides no additional meaning beyond the schema, such as parameter usage or format. Baseline 3 is appropriate.

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 'Read one Kimai project' with the specific endpoint '/api/projects/<id>'. This distinguishes it from sibling tools like kimai_list_projects (which lists) and other get_* tools.

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 says 'Read one Kimai project from /api/projects/<id>', implying use this when you need a single project by ID. It does not explicitly exclude listing, but the name and sibling context make the usage clear.

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