Retrieve all Clockify workspaces visible to the authenticated user, with an optional single-role filter for admin, owner, team manager, or project manager access.
Lists workspaces visible to the authenticated user. For richer role filtering (multiple roles), use clockify_request.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| role | No | Optional single-role filter (matches Clockify OpenAPI typing). |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v0.1.5Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
With no annotations, the description carries the full behavioral burden. It usefully discloses that results are scoped to the authenticated user (auth-dependent visibility) and "Lists" implies a non-mutating read, but it says nothing about pagination, ordering, 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.
Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?
Two sentences, zero waste, with the core behavior front-loaded before the alternative-tool hint. Every clause earns its place.
Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.
Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?
For a one-optional-parameter read tool with no output schema and no annotations, the description covers what it does, who sees what, and the escape hatch to clockify_request. Only minor gaps (pagination/return shape) remain, and those are low-stakes here.
Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.
Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?
Schema coverage is 100% and the single role parameter is fully documented with its enum and the single-role limitation in the schema itself. The description's "richer role filtering" wording only implies the role parameter, adding no syntax or format 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.
Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?
States a specific verb and resource ("Lists workspaces") plus scope ("visible to the authenticated user"), so the operation is unambiguous. It also contrasts itself with clockify_request for the multi-role case, though it does not differentiate from the other list_* siblings.
Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.
Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?
Explicitly routes the agent to clockify_request when richer/multi-role filtering is needed, which is a concrete alternative and condition. It stops short of stating when-not to use this tool or any prerequisites for the single-role path.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.