Clockify MCP Server

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden. It mentions 'auto-detects workspace', which hints at default behavior, but fails to disclose critical behavioral traits such as whether this is a read-only operation, potential rate limits, authentication requirements, or what happens if parameters are omitted. For a tool with 5 parameters and no annotations, this is a significant gap in transparency.

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 very concise with a single sentence, which is efficient and front-loaded. However, it may be overly brief given the tool's complexity, potentially sacrificing clarity for brevity. Every word earns its place, but more detail could improve usefulness.

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 tool has 5 parameters, no annotations, and no output schema, the description is incomplete. It doesn't explain what the report contains, how entries are structured, or what the return value looks like. For a 'detailed report' tool with multiple filters, this lack of context makes it inadequate for effective use.

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%, so the schema fully documents all 5 parameters. The description adds minimal value beyond the schema by implying workspace auto-detection for the 'workspaceId' parameter, but doesn't provide additional context for other parameters like date formats or filtering logic. Baseline 3 is appropriate when the schema does the heavy lifting.

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 states the tool retrieves a 'detailed report with individual entries' and mentions 'auto-detects workspace', which provides a basic purpose. However, it lacks specificity about what type of report (e.g., time tracking, financial) and doesn't clearly differentiate from sibling tools like 'get_summary_report' or 'get_time_entries', making the purpose somewhat vague.

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 no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It mentions 'auto-detects workspace' but doesn't explain when this is beneficial or when to choose this over similar tools like 'get_summary_report' or 'get_time_entries'. No explicit when/when-not instructions or alternative references are provided.

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