Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
redmine-mcp-stdio

redmine-mcp-stdio

by andrelaptenok
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Local

List time entries

list_time_entries
Read-only

Retrieve time entries filtered by issue, project, user, or date range for tracking work logs.

Instructions

List time entries, filtered by issue, project, user or date range

Tool call template

This tool declares no required parameters. Add optional parameters from the input schema as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {},
    "name": "list_time_entries"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
toNoEnd date YYYY-MM-DD
fromNoStart date YYYY-MM-DD
limitNo
offsetNo
user_idNoUser id or 'me'
issue_idNo
project_idNo

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv1.0.0

TDQS

B3.3/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, indicating a safe read operation. The description adds context about filtering capabilities but does not disclose pagination behavior (limit/offset) or output format. For a tool with annotations, this is adequate but not rich.

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?

Single, front-loaded sentence with no wasted words. The core action and filters are immediately clear.

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

Completeness3/5

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

Given 7 parameters, 43% schema coverage, no output schema, and read-only annotations, the description should explain more about pagination, output format, and filter combination logic. It provides the essential purpose but lacks completeness for complex usage.

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 description coverage is 43% (3 of 7 parameters described). The description adds meaning by listing filter categories (issue, project, user, date range) which map to the relevant parameters, but it does not cover pagination parameters (limit, offset) or clarify parameter interactions. The description partially compensates for the schema gap.

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

Purpose4/5

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

The description clearly states the action ('List') and resource ('time entries') and specifies the filtering dimensions (issue, project, user, date range). It distinguishes from siblings like 'log_time' (which logs new entries) and 'list_issues' (different resource).

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

Usage Guidelines2/5

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

No explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. The description implies usage for retrieving filtered time entries, but does not mention when not to use it or provide comparisons to siblings like 'log_time' or 'list_issues'.

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