Skip to main content
Glama

timecard_get_projects

Retrieve available projects from TimeCard MCP to manage timesheet entries, enabling selection of project IDs for activity lookup and hour tracking.

Instructions

Get list of available projects. Returns project id and name.

Use the project id with timecard_get_activities to get activity options, and with timecard_save to set entries.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault

No arguments

Implementation Reference

  • The handler for the timecard_get_projects tool, which fetches available project options using the provided TimeCardSession.
    handler: async (args, session: TimeCardSession) => {
      const authResult = await session.ensureAuthenticated();
      if (!authResult.success) {
        throw new Error(authResult.message);
      }
    
      try {
        const projects = await session.getProjectOptions();
    
        return {
          projects: projects.map(p => ({
            id: p.id,
            name: p.name,
            description: p.name
          })),
          count: projects.length
        };
      } catch (error) {
        throw new Error(`Failed to get projects: ${error instanceof Error ? error.message : 'Unknown error'}`);
      }
    }
  • Registration of the timecard_get_projects tool in the dataTools array.
    timecardGetProjects,
  • Input schema definition for timecard_get_projects.
    inputSchema: {
      type: 'object',
      properties: {}
    },
Behavior3/5

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden. It discloses the return format (project id and name) and hints at a read-only operation ('Get list'), but lacks details on behavioral traits like pagination, error conditions, authentication needs, or rate limits. For a read tool with zero annotation coverage, this is minimally adequate but leaves gaps.

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?

The description is highly concise and well-structured: two sentences that front-load the core purpose and follow with specific usage guidance. Every sentence earns its place by providing essential information without redundancy or fluff.

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?

Given the tool's simplicity (0 parameters, no output schema, no annotations), the description is reasonably complete. It explains what the tool does, what it returns, and how to use the output with siblings. However, it lacks details on output structure (e.g., list format) and behavioral aspects, which could be improved for full completeness.

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?

The input schema has 0 parameters with 100% coverage, so no parameter documentation is needed. The description appropriately adds no parameter details, focusing instead on usage context. This meets the baseline for tools with no parameters, as it doesn't need to compensate for schema gaps.

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 tool's purpose: 'Get list of available projects' with specific outputs (project id and name). It distinguishes itself from siblings by focusing on project retrieval rather than activities, summaries, timesheets, or saving. However, it doesn't explicitly contrast with timecard_get_activities which also retrieves data, though for different resources.

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?

The description provides explicit guidance on when to use this tool: 'Use the project id with timecard_get_activities to get activity options, and with timecard_save to set entries.' It names specific sibling tools (timecard_get_activities and timecard_save) as alternatives for downstream actions, clearly establishing this as a prerequisite step in a workflow.

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

Install Server

Other Tools

Latest Blog Posts

MCP directory API

We provide all the information about MCP servers via our MCP API.

curl -X GET 'https://glama.ai/api/mcp/v1/servers/keith-hung/timecard-mcp'

If you have feedback or need assistance with the MCP directory API, please join our Discord server