lightbulb-mcp

Overview Schema Source Related Servers Discussions Admin

smokeball_create_time_entry

DestructiveIdempotent

Create time entries in Smokeball from your project, using authenticated connector credentials to log billable hours accurately and avoid duplicate records.

Instructions

Smokeball connector operation create_time_entry (platform tool smokeball.create_time_entry).

Routes only through the exact project/account governed connector authority.

Args: arguments: JSON string of arguments for the connector operation. project_id: Authenticated Project UUID. project_ref: Exact project correlation reference. connector_account_ref: Project-bound connector account alias. idempotency_key: Stable business-action identity. effect: Claimed read or write effect; Spring verifies it. approval_ref: Approved platform task UUID when resuming a write.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Default
`effect`	No
`arguments`	No	{}
`project_id`	No
`project_ref`	No
`approval_ref`	No
`idempotency_key`	No
`connector_account_ref`	No

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`result`	Yes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

Changed6 schema fields changedv0.1.1Sep 7, 2026

addedInput schema / properties / approval_ref

Added value: +{
+  "anyOf": [
+    {
+      "type": "string"
+    },
+    {
+      "type": "null"
+    }
+  ],
+  "default": null,
+  "title": "Approval Ref"
+}

addedInput schema / properties / connector_account_ref

Added value: +{
+  "anyOf": [
+    {
+      "type": "string"
+    },
+    {
+      "type": "null"
+    }
+  ],
+  "default": null,
+  "title": "Connector Account Ref"
+}

addedInput schema / properties / effect

Added value: +{
+  "anyOf": [
+    {
+      "type": "string"
+    },
+    {
+      "type": "null"
+    }
+  ],
+  "default": null,
+  "title": "Effect"
+}

addedInput schema / properties / idempotency_key

Added value: +{
+  "anyOf": [
+    {
+      "type": "string"
+    },
+    {
+      "type": "null"
+    }
+  ],
+  "default": null,
+  "title": "Idempotency Key"
+}

addedInput schema / properties / project_id

Added value: +{
+  "anyOf": [
+    {
+      "type": "string"
+    },
+    {
+      "type": "null"
+    }
+  ],
+  "default": null,
+  "title": "Project Id"
+}

addedInput schema / properties / project_ref

Added value: +{
+  "anyOf": [
+    {
+      "type": "string"
+    },
+    {
+      "type": "null"
+    }
+  ],
+  "default": null,
+  "title": "Project Ref"
+}

First observedv0.1.0Jun 25, 2026

TDQS

C2/5.0

Behavior1/5

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

The description discloses no behavioral traits beyond the annotations. It does not describe side effects (e.g., whether the time entry is immediately billable, whether it triggers notifications), return value shape, or error conditions. There is a notable tension: the annotation marks destructiveHint:true while the operation is 'create', which is normally additive, but this is not explicitly contradicted by the description text itself.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness4/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

The description is short and well-structured: an opening line identifying the operation, a single routing constraint sentence, and a clean bulleted list of parameters. It is appropriately front-loaded with the operation name. The only minor waste is the boilerplate routing sentence that adds little information.

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

Completeness1/5

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

Given seven parameters, zero required fields, zero schema descriptions, and an output schema that is never mentioned, the description is markedly incomplete. It omits the time-entry payload contract, the output response shape, error semantics, and any domain-level context about Smokeball time tracking. It also fails to position the tool relative to its many sibling connector operations.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters2/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

With 0% schema coverage, the description provides terse one-line glosses for all seven parameters, which is helpful. However, the crucial 'arguments' parameter is only described as a 'JSON string of arguments for the connector operation' with no indication of its expected structure—nothing about matter_id, staff_id, duration, date, or description. Terms like 'Exact project correlation reference' are jargon-heavy and leave the caller guessing.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose3/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The name 'create_time_entry' plus the phrase 'Smokeball connector operation' make the primary action reasonably identifiable. However, the description merely restates the name and never explains what a 'time entry' means in Smokeball's domain (e.g., billable hours, matter-linked, staff-attributed), nor how it differs from sibling tools like smokeball_create_task or xero_create_time_entry.

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

Usage Guidelines1/5

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

No guidance is given on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as smokeball_list_time_entries, smokeball_request, or xero_create_time_entry. There are no prerequisites, no 'use this when...' instructions, and no mention of required context like an existing matter or staff member. The sentence about routing through 'project/account governed connector authority' is a constraint, not usage guidance.

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

Deploy Server