gryzzly-mcp

create_project

Create a Gryzzly project to organize tasks and time entries, assigning customer, managers, contributors, and visibility. Verify it doesn't exist first, then add tasks so time can be logged.

Instructions

Create a project, the container tasks and time are attached to. A customer and managers or contributors can be named rather than identified. Gryzzly needs a start date, so today is used when none is given; a private project takes contributors, a public one must not. Check list_projects first, since a second call creates a duplicate; then add tasks with create_task, because time cannot be logged on a project without one.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description
`code`	No	The project's short code.
`name`	Yes	The project's name.
`tags`	No	Tag identifiers to attach.
`end_at`	No	When the project is supposed to end.
`groups`	No	Group identifiers to assign.
`customer`	No	The customer, by name or id.
`managers`	No	The managers, by name, email or id.
`start_at`	No	When the project starts. Required by Gryzzly. Defaults to today.
`visibility`	No	`public` (everyone) or `private` (contributors only).
`is_billable`	No	Whether the project is billable.
`contributors`	No	The contributors, by name, email or id. Must be empty on a public project.

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description
`id`	Yes	The project's identifier.
`code`	No	The project's short code.
`name`	No	The project's name.
`note`	No	The project note.
`tags`	No	The tags attached to the project.
`end_at`	No	When the project is supposed to end.
`groups`	No	The groups assigned to the project.
`status`	No	One of `active`, `done`, `archived`.
`managers`	No	The users managing the project.
`start_at`	No	When the project starts.
`created_at`	No	When the project was created.
`updated_at`	No	When the project was last updated.
`visibility`	No	`public` or `private`.
`customer_id`	No	The customer this project belongs to, when any.
`is_billable`	No	Whether the project is billable.
`contributors`	No	The users allowed to declare on a private project.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv0.1.0Oct 20, 2026

TDQS

A4.4/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

Annotations declare readOnlyHint=false, idempotentHint=false, destructiveHint=false and openWorldHint=true, so the safety profile is already covered. The description goes further with genuinely new behavior: duplicate creation on repeat calls, the implicit start-date default ('today is used when none is given'), and the cross-field invariant that a public project must not carry contributors. It stops short of permissions/auth or what the response contains.

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?

Front-loaded with the purpose, then ordered as constraints, defaults and the recommended call sequence. It is dense but nearly every clause carries actionable content; the 'Gryzzly needs a start date' framing is slightly verbose relative to the point it makes.

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

Completeness5/5

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

For an eleven-parameter create tool with an output schema, the description supplies the domain role, the defaulting behavior, the visibility/contributor invariant, the duplicate risk and the required next step. Nothing needed to invoke it correctly in sequence is missing.

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%, so the schema already documents all eleven parameters, including start_at's default and the contributors/public constraint. The description adds only a modest relational gloss ('A customer and managers or contributors can be named rather than identified'), which the schema fields largely restate. 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.

Purpose5/5

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

States a specific verb and resource, then adds the conceptual role ('the container tasks and time are attached to'), which is exactly what an agent needs to place it in the domain model. It also names siblings (list_projects, create_task), so it is separable from create_task, create_customer and the other create_* tools 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 an explicit precondition ('Check list_projects first, since a second call creates a duplicate') and an explicit follow-up ('then add tasks with create_task, because time cannot be logged on a project without one'). The alternative/complementary tools and the conditions selecting them are stated outright rather than inferred.

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