Skip to main content
Glama
bim-ba

ycli

by bim-ba
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Python
Remote

List Tracker worklog

tracker_worklog_list
Read-onlyIdempotent

List all time-tracking worklog entries for a single Tracker issue key, with optional limit and automatic pagination.

Instructions

All time-tracking entries logged against a single Tracker issue.

Auto-paginated via the relative id-cursor. Capped at the configured item cap unless limit is given.

Scoped to one issue by issue_key. To search worklog across the whole org (by author and/or a creation-time range) use worklog_search instead.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
limitNoMax records to return; omitted means the configured cap (YCLI__HTTP__MAX_ITEMS).
issue_keyYesIssue key, e.g. QUEUE-123.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed3 schema fields changedv0.122.1
    • addedInput schema / properties / issue_key
      Added value: +{
+  "description": "Issue key, e.g. QUEUE-123.",
+  "type": "string"
+}
    • removedInput schema / properties / key
      Removed value: -{
-  "description": "Issue key, e.g. QUEUE-123.",
-  "type": "string"
-}
    • changedInput schema / required
      Previous value: -[
-  "key"
-]New value: +[
+  "issue_key"
+]
  2. First observedv0.67.0

TDQS

A4.4/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint and openWorldHint, so safety is covered. The description nonetheless adds real behavior: auto-pagination via a relative id-cursor, and that results are capped by the configured item cap unless limit is supplied. Ordering and any permission requirements are not stated, so it falls short of a 5.

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?

Three short paragraphs, front-loaded with purpose, then behavior, then routing. No filler, no repetition of the title, and every sentence carries distinct 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?

For a two-param, no-output-schema read tool this covers purpose, scope, pagination and the alternative route. What remains unstated is result ordering and whether page traversal is transparent to the caller, which matters slightly given the auto-pagination claim.

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% and both parameters are documented there, so the baseline is 3. The description restates the limit/cap relationship (already in the schema) and reinforces that issue_key scopes to a single issue, but adds no format, ordering, or cursor semantics beyond structured data.

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?

States a specific verb and resource ("All time-tracking entries logged against a single Tracker issue") plus the scoping dimension, and explicitly names the sibling that handles the other scope. An agent can distinguish it from tracker_worklog_search and tracker_worklog_list_global without opening any schema.

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

Usage Guidelines5/5

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

Gives both the when-to-use condition (one issue, keyed by issue_key) and the when-not condition with the named alternative ("To search worklog across the whole org ... use worklog_search instead"). Routing is explicit and requires no inference.

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