MCP Work History Server
The MCP Work History Server enables detailed logging and tracking of AI tool activities:
🕐 Track timestamps: Log activities with precise HH:MM timestamps
🔧 Monitor tools: Record which AI tool performed the action
🧠 Model tracking: Track the AI model used (e.g., gemini-2.5-pro, claude-3-sonnet)
📊 Metrics logging: Track token usage, context length, duration, and cost
🏷️ Tagging system: Categorize activities with custom tags
✅❌ Success/failure tracking: Log both successful operations and errors
📁 Daily organization: Create separate markdown files for each day
📝 Clean format: Use bullet-point style entries for easy scanning
🎯 MCP compatibility: Works with any MCP-enabled AI client
Enables tracking GitHub Copilot usage with token consumption, success/failure states, and error messages in organized daily logs.
Provides automated activity logging for Warp AI interactions, tracking model usage, token consumption, and performance metrics with tagging capabilities.
Click on "Install Server".
Wait a few minutes for the server to deploy. Once ready, it will show a "Started" state.
In the chat, type
@followed by the MCP server name and your instructions, e.g., "@MCP Work History Serverlog that I just fixed a bug in the payment module using Claude Code with 850 tokens in 1.2 seconds"
That's it! The server will respond to your query, and you can continue using it as needed.
Here is a step-by-step guide with screenshots.
📋 MCP Work History Server
🤖 A Model Context Protocol (MCP) server that allows AI tools to log their activities to daily worklog files with detailed tracking of tool names, AI models, and timestamps.
✨ Features
🕐 Precise timestamps - Logs activities with HH:MM format
🔧 Tool tracking - Records which AI tool performed the action
🧠 Model tracking - Tracks which AI model was used (e.g., gemini-2.5-pro, claude-3-sonnet)
📊 Comprehensive metrics - Token usage, context length, duration, cost tracking
🏷️ Tagging system - Categorize activities with custom tags
✅❌ Success/failure tracking - Log both successful operations and errors
📁 Daily organization - Creates separate markdown files for each day
📝 Clean format - Bullet-point style entries for easy scanning
🎯 MCP compatible - Works with any MCP-enabled AI client
Related MCP server: Changerawr MCP Server
🚀 Installation
npm install🎮 Usage
Start the MCP server:
npm startOr run in development mode with auto-restart:
npm run dev🛠️ MCP Tool
The server provides one tool:
log_activity
Logs an AI tool's activity to the current day's worklog file in a concise, scannable format.
Parameters:
Required:
tool_name(string): Name of the AI tool (e.g., "Warp", "Claude Code", "GitHub Copilot")log_message(string): Detailed description of what was accomplished
Optional:
ai_model(string): AI model used (e.g., "gemini-2.5-pro", "claude-3-sonnet", "gpt-4")tokens_used(number): Total tokens consumed in the requestinput_tokens(number): Input tokens used (alternative to tokens_used)output_tokens(number): Output tokens generated (alternative to tokens_used)context_length(number): Context window length used (in thousands)duration_ms(number): Duration of the operation in millisecondscost_usd(number): Estimated cost in USDsuccess(boolean): Whether the operation was successful (defaults to true)error_message(string): Error message if operation failedtags(array): Tags to categorize the activity (e.g., ["coding", "debugging", "refactoring"])
Example log entries:
# 📝 Work Log - 2024-01-15
- ✅ 08:31 - Warp (gemini-2.5-pro): Refactored authentication module to use JWT tokens (1250 tokens | 8k ctx | 2.3s | $0.0043 | [refactoring, auth])
- ✅ 09:15 - Claude Code (claude-3-sonnet): Fixed database connection pooling issue (850→320 tokens | 1.1s | $0.0021)
- ❌ 10:42 - GitHub Copilot (gpt-4): Attempted to implement user profile endpoint (❌ Timeout error | [coding, api])
- ✅ 11:30 - Warp: Quick code review and suggestions (500 tokens | 0.8s)📂 Log File Structure
Logs are stored in the logs/ directory with the naming pattern worklog-YYYY-MM-DD.md.
Each log file contains:
📝 Emoji-enhanced date header
🕐 Timestamped bullet-point entries
🔧 Tool name and AI model information
📋 Concise activity descriptions
⚙️ MCP Configuration
For Warp AI
Add this server to your Warp MCP configuration:
{
"mcp-work-history": {
"command": "node",
"args": ["/Users/your-username/path/to/mcp-work-history/src/index.js"],
"env": {},
"working_directory": null,
"start_on_launch": true
}
}For Claude Desktop
Add to your claude_desktop_config.json:
{
"mcpServers": {
"work-history": {
"command": "node",
"args": ["/absolute/path/to/mcp-work-history/src/index.js"]
}
}
}Example Usage in AI Tools
Once configured, AI tools can log their activities like this:
Basic usage:
log_activity({
tool_name: "Warp",
log_message: "Created React component for user dashboard"
})With comprehensive metrics:
log_activity({
tool_name: "Warp",
ai_model: "gemini-2.5-pro",
log_message: "Refactored authentication system with OAuth integration",
tokens_used: 1250,
context_length: 8,
duration_ms: 2300,
cost_usd: 0.0043,
success: true,
tags: ["refactoring", "auth", "oauth"]
})Error logging:
log_activity({
tool_name: "GitHub Copilot",
ai_model: "gpt-4",
log_message: "Attempted to implement user profile endpoint",
input_tokens: 800,
output_tokens: 0,
success: false,
error_message: "Timeout error",
tags: ["coding", "api"]
})🗂️ Project Structure
mcp-work-history/
├── 📄 src/index.js # Main MCP server code
├── 📁 logs/ # Daily worklog files (auto-created)
│ ├── worklog-2024-01-15.md
│ └── worklog-2024-01-16.md
├── 📦 package.json # Dependencies and scripts
├── 🚫 .gitignore # Git ignore rules
└── 📋 README.md # This file🤝 Contributing
Fork the repository
Create your feature branch (
git checkout -b feature/amazing-feature)Commit your changes (
git commit -m 'Add some amazing feature')Push to the branch (
git push origin feature/amazing-feature)Open a Pull Request
🎯 Real-World Example: Warp AI Integration
Here's how to set up automatic activity logging in Warp AI:
Step 1: Configure MCP Server in Warp
Add the following to your Warp MCP configuration:
{
"mcp-work-history": {
"command": "node",
"args": ["/Users/nocoo/Workspace/mcp-work-history/src/index.js"],
"env": {},
"working_directory": null,
"start_on_launch": true
}
}Step 2: Add Logging Rule to Warp
Configure Warp with this rule to automatically log AI activities:
Rule: "When AI task is done, use mcp-work-history to log this time AI task details. Send AI tool name (Warp), model used, detailed time, and a brief summary of this time task and result."
Step 3: See It in Action

Screenshot showing the MCP Work History server automatically logging AI activities in Warp
What Gets Logged
With this setup, every AI interaction in Warp will automatically create entries like:
# 📝 Work Log - 2024-12-06
- ✅ 14:32 - Warp (gemini-2.5-pro): Refactored React component to use custom hooks for state management (1240 tokens | 4.2s | [refactoring, react])
- ✅ 14:45 - Warp (gemini-2.5-pro): Fixed TypeScript type errors in authentication module (890 tokens | 2.1s | [bugfix, typescript])
- ✅ 15:10 - Warp (gemini-2.5-pro): Added comprehensive unit tests for user service (1560 tokens | 3.8s | [testing, unit-tests])Benefits
📊 Automatic tracking - No manual logging required
🔍 Detailed insights - Track token usage, performance, and costs
📈 Progress monitoring - See your daily coding accomplishments
🏷️ Activity categorization - Organize work with tags
💰 Cost tracking - Monitor AI usage costs over time
📄 License
MIT License - see the LICENSE file for details.
Available Tools
1 toollog_activityC
Log AI tool activity to a daily worklog file with comprehensive metrics
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| tool_name | Yes | Name of the AI tool that performed the activity (e.g., 'Warp', 'Claude Code', 'GitHub Copilot') | |
| log_message | Yes | Detailed log message describing what was accomplished | |
| ai_model | No | AI model used (e.g., 'gemini-2.5-pro', 'claude-3-sonnet', 'gpt-4') | |
| tokens_used | No | Total tokens consumed in the request (optional) | |
| input_tokens | No | Input tokens used (optional) | |
| output_tokens | No | Output tokens generated (optional) | |
| context_length | No | Context window length used (optional) | |
| duration_ms | No | Duration of the operation in milliseconds (optional) | |
| cost_usd | No | Estimated cost in USD (optional) | |
| success | No | Whether the operation was successful (optional, defaults to true) | |
| error_message | No | Error message if operation failed (optional) | |
| tags | No | Tags to categorize the activity (e.g., ['coding', 'debugging', 'refactoring']) (optional) |
TDQS
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
With no annotations provided, the description carries full burden for behavioral disclosure. It mentions 'comprehensive metrics' but doesn't specify file location, format, append vs overwrite behavior, permissions needed, rate limits, or error handling. For a logging tool with 12 parameters, this leaves significant behavioral gaps.
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?
The description is a single, efficient sentence that clearly states the core purpose. It's appropriately sized for the tool's complexity, though it could potentially be more front-loaded with critical behavioral information given the lack of annotations.
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 logging tool with 12 parameters, no annotations, and no output schema, the description is insufficient. It doesn't explain what 'comprehensive metrics' means in practice, how the logging integrates with systems, what format the worklog uses, or what happens on failure. The agent would need to guess about important behavioral aspects.
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 description coverage is 100%, so the schema already documents all 12 parameters thoroughly. The description adds no specific parameter information beyond the generic 'comprehensive metrics' mention, which doesn't provide additional semantic value beyond what's in the schema.
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?
The description clearly states the action ('Log AI tool activity') and destination ('to a daily worklog file with comprehensive metrics'), providing a specific verb+resource combination. However, without sibling tools for comparison, we cannot assess differentiation from alternatives, so it doesn't reach the highest score.
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?
The description provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus other logging or tracking methods, nor does it mention prerequisites, frequency recommendations, or integration context. It simply states what the tool does without usage context.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
TDQS
With only one tool, there is no possibility of ambiguity or overlap between tools. The tool's purpose is clearly defined and distinct by default.
A single tool inherently has perfect naming consistency, as there are no other tools to compare it against. The name 'log_activity' follows a clear verb_noun pattern.
A single tool is too few for a server with a broad purpose like 'Work History,' which suggests tracking or managing activities. This minimal set severely limits functionality and likely leaves significant gaps in coverage.
The server is severely incomplete for a work history domain. It only allows logging activity but lacks essential operations like retrieving, updating, deleting, or querying logs, making it impossible for agents to perform basic CRUD workflows.
Maintenance
Resources
Unclaimed servers have limited discoverability.
Looking for Admin?
If you are the server author, to access and configure the admin panel.
Related MCP Connectors
A comprehensive Model Context Protocol (MCP) server that enables AI assistants to interact with yo…
A Model Context Protocol server for Wix AI tools
One memory, every AI. A shared, user-owned markdown memory your AI clients read and write over MCP.
Markdown-based note-taking with a hosted MCP server. Your notes serve you and your AI.
Related MCP Servers
FlicenseAqualityFmaintenanceAn open-source server implementing the Model Context Protocol (MCP) that enables capturing insights from AI sessions and transforming them into persistent, searchable knowledge accessible across tools.78- AlicenseNot gradedqualityDmaintenanceA Model Context Protocol server that enables AI assistants like Claude to manage changelogs, projects, and content through natural language interactions with Changerawr instances.2MIT
- AlicenseBqualityFmaintenanceA Model Context Protocol server for AI agents to manage tasks and track progress across projects, with features like project isolation, search, and reporting.11161MIT
- FlicenseNot gradedqualityDmaintenanceA Model Context Protocol server that connects multiple AI models into a single workflow, enabling multi-model orchestration, conversation continuity, and tools like code review, planning, and CLI-to-CLI bridging.
Appeared in Searches
Latest Blog Posts
- Who's Calling? MCP Hosts Are an Identity Blind Spot (And the Spec Knows It)By Om-Shree-0709 on .mcpAgent IdentityOAuth 2.1
- Your AI Chatbot Just Exposed Your CEO's Salary to an InternBy Om-Shree-0709 on .Agent IdentityMCP SecurityOAuth Delegation
- Why MCP Servers Need Execution Sandboxing (And Why Your Current Stack Isn't Enough)By Om-Shree-0709 on .Agentic AiPrompt InjectionWebAssembly
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/nocoo/mcp-work-history'
If you have feedback or need assistance with the MCP directory API, please join our Discord server