Skip to main content
Glama
Selerity

accelo-mcp

by Selerity
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Python
Hybrid

accelo_create_activity

Create and log activities like notes, calls, emails, or meetings in Accelo, attaching them to companies, jobs, or issues and setting billable time and visibility.

Instructions

Create a new activity (note, email, call, or meeting).

Args: subject: Activity subject (required) against_type: Object type to create against (required). E.g. company, job, issue, staff, task against_id: ID of the object to create against (required) body: Activity body/content medium: Type — 'note', 'meeting', 'email', or 'call' (default: note) priority_id: Priority ID class_id: Activity class ID owner_type: Owner type ('staff' or 'affiliation') owner_id: Owner ID (staff_id or affiliation_id) billable: Billable time in seconds nonbillable: Non-billable time in seconds task: Task ID to log the activity against. To log time against a task, set against_type/against_id to the task's PARENT (job/milestone/issue) and pass the task ID here (sent to Accelo as task_id). visibility: Activity visibility — 'private' (default), 'confidential', or 'all'. MUST be 'all' to log billable/non-billable time; the Accelo default of 'private' silently prevents time logging. date_started: Start date as a unix timestamp (seconds since UTC). For meetings this is the scheduled start; for other activities it sets the logged date (date_logged derives from date_started, falling back to date_created when unset). fields: Additional fields to return

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
bodyNo
taskNo
fieldsNo
mediumNo
subjectYes
billableNo
class_idNo
owner_idNo
against_idYes
owner_typeNo
visibilityNo
nonbillableNo
priority_idNo
against_typeYes
date_startedNo

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed3 schema fields changedv0.2.1
    • addedInput schema / properties / date_started
      Added value: +{
+  "anyOf": [
+    {
+      "type": "integer"
+    },
+    {
+      "type": "null"
+    }
+  ],
+  "default": null,
+  "title": "Date Started"
+}
    • addedInput schema / properties / task
      Added value: +{
+  "anyOf": [
+    {
+      "type": "integer"
+    },
+    {
+      "type": "null"
+    }
+  ],
+  "default": null,
+  "title": "Task"
+}
    • addedInput schema / properties / visibility
      Added value: +{
+  "anyOf": [
+    {
+      "type": "string"
+    },
+    {
+      "type": "null"
+    }
+  ],
+  "default": null,
+  "title": "Visibility"
+}
  2. First observedv0.1.0

TDQS

A4.5/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full behavioral burden. It discloses important gotchas: visibility must be 'all' for billable/non-billable time logging, the Accelo default of 'private' silently prevents time logging, and date_started derives date_logged with a fallback. It does not mention auth, errors, or return shape, but the most critical behavioral traps are surfaced.

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?

The description is front-loaded with a one-line summary followed by a structured Args list. Every line adds operational value, and the length is justified by the large parameter count. There is no filler or repetition of schema-only information.

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?

The description covers all parameters and the most important behavioral constraints, which is substantial for a 15-parameter tool with no annotations and no output schema. The only notable gap is that it never explicitly states what the successful response contains, though 'fields: Additional fields to return' hints at the response shape.

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

Parameters5/5

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

Schema description coverage is 0%, so the description must compensate, and it does: all 15 parameters are documented with defaults, allowed values, units, and cross-field relationships. Notable examples include the task parent requirement, the visibility/time-logging constraint, and the unix timestamp semantics for date_started.

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 opens with a specific verb and resource: 'Create a new activity (note, email, call, or meeting).' It clearly distinguishes this from sibling tools like accelo_update_activity, accelo_delete_activity, and accelo_list_activities by focusing on creation and enumerating the activity types.

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 intended use is clear: this tool creates a new activity. It does not explicitly name alternatives or exclusions, but the create/update/delete/list sibling split makes the usage context unambiguous. The detailed task-logging guidance also helps when deciding how to structure certain calls.

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

Deploy Server

Other Tools