Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
Tradify MCP server

Tradify MCP server

by cotletdev
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Python
Hybrid

List timesheets

list_timesheets
Read-onlyIdempotent

Retrieve timesheet entries for a date range, filtered by staff member or job, showing hours, billing rates, notes, and invoice status, with total hours.

Instructions

Timesheet entries in a date range: staff, job, customer, billing rate, hours, notes, invoiced.

Returns the time entries between from and to (both days included, at most 62 days), oldest first, each with staff member, job and customer (none for time off a job), billing rate and whether it is billable, start and end (ISO 8601 with the company's UTC offset), hours, notes and whether it is on an invoice. staff and job_id narrow it. total_hours sums the entries returned.

Tool call template

Replace each placeholder with a value matching the input schema. Only required parameters are included; add optional parameters as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {
      "from": "<from>",
      "to": "<to>"
    },
    "name": "list_timesheets"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
toYesLast day, up to 62 days after from.
fromYesFirst day.
staffNoOnly this staff member, by full name.
job_idNoOnly time on this job (list_jobs).

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Addedv1.0.3

TDQS

A4.5/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

Annotations already declare read-only/idempotent/non-destructive, and the description adds substantial traits beyond that: the 62-day maximum, inclusive bounds on both days, oldest-first ordering, ISO 8601 timestamps in the company's UTC offset, null customer for non-job time, and the invoiced flag. This is exactly the behavioral context annotations cannot convey.

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?

Two sentences, front-loaded with resource and scope before the detail. The second sentence packs return-shape, ordering, filtering and aggregation into one long chain, which is dense but every clause carries 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?

With no output schema, the description does the work of describing the returned fields, which is appropriate. It stops short of stating what happens if the range exceeds 62 days (error vs. truncation) or whether results ever paginate, which an agent needs before calling with edge-case inputs.

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

Parameters4/5

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

Schema coverage is 100%, so baseline is 3, but the description adds meaning: from and to are inclusive day bounds with a 62-day ceiling, staff filters by full name, and job_id restricts to a single job. The only gap is that it never explains what total_hours is relative to (a response field, not a parameter), leaving a small ambiguity.

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?

First sentence names the resource (timesheet entries) and scope (a date range), and enumerates the fields each entry carries. It is clearly the read path against the sibling write tool log_time, and no other sibling returns time entries.

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?

States the operating context: requires from/to, capped at 62 days, and that staff and job_id narrow the result set. It does not name alternative tools or exclusions (e.g. use log_time to write, list_jobs to resolve job ids beyond the schema hint), so guidance is clear but not routing-complete.

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