MCP Request Tracker CrunchTools

Add Time Worked Tool

add_time_worked_tool

Add extra time in minutes to a ticket's total time worked, recording work hours against a specific ticket ID during logging or updates.

Instructions

Add time to the time worked on a ticket.

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": {
      "ticket_id": "<ticket_id>",
      "minutes": "<minutes>"
    },
    "name": "add_time_worked_tool"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`minutes`	Yes	Additional time to add in minutes
`ticket_id`	Yes	The ticket ID number

Output Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`result`	Yes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

Changed6 schema fields changedv0.6.0Oct 17, 2026
- addedInput schema / additionalProperties
```
Added value: +false
```
- addedInput schema / properties / minutes / description
```
Added value: +"Additional time to add in minutes"
```
- addedInput schema / properties / minutes / minimum
```
Added value: +1
```
- addedInput schema / properties / ticket_id / description
```
Added value: +"The ticket ID number"
```
- addedInput schema / properties / ticket_id / minimum
```
Added value: +1
```
- removedOutput schema / description
```
Removed value: -"Generic wrapper for non-object return types."
```
Changed4 schema fields changedSep 25, 2026
- removedInput schema / additionalProperties
```
Removed value: -false
```
- removedInput schema / properties / minutes / description
```
Removed value: -"Additional time to add in minutes"
```
- removedInput schema / properties / ticket_id / description
```
Removed value: -"The ticket ID number"
```
- addedOutput schema / description
```
Added value: +"Generic wrapper for non-object return types."
```
First observedv0.4.0Aug 19, 2026

TDQS

C2.9/5.0

Behavior2/5

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It implies a mutation ('Add time') but says nothing about whether the time is appended to a running total, whether it requires the ticket to be owned by the caller, or how invalid/rejected entries behave. For an unannotated mutation tool this is a significant gap.

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?

One short, front-loaded sentence with no filler. It is appropriately sized but arguably under-specified rather than deliberately concise.

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?

An output schema exists, so return values need no explanation, and the input surface is small (2 params at 100% coverage). Still, as an unannotated write tool with a near-identical sibling, the description should at least clarify additive semantics and the add-vs-set distinction.

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 100%, so both parameters (ticket_id, minutes) are already documented in the schema, including that minutes is 'Additional time to add in minutes'. The description adds no format, unit, or constraint detail beyond the schema, so the baseline 3 applies.

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 states a specific verb and resource ('Add time ... on a ticket') and the word 'Add' distinguishes it semantically from the sibling set_time_worked_tool by implying an increment rather than a replacement. However, it never names or contrasts with that sibling, so the differentiation is only implicit.

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?

There is no when-to-use guidance and no mention of set_time_worked_tool, the obvious alternative for logging time. An agent must infer from the tool name alone whether to add or set time, and no prerequisites (e.g. ticket must be assigned to the caller) are stated.

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

Deploy Server