Amazing Marvin MCP

by qemqemqem

Overview Schema Source Related Servers Discussions Admin

Python

Local

start_time_tracking

Start tracking time on a specific task to monitor focused work. Use stop and check commands to manage time tracking.

Instructions

Start time tracking for a specific task.

Use when beginning focused work on a task to measure time spent. Check current tracking status with get_currently_tracked_item() or time_tracking_summary(). Stop tracking with stop_time_tracking(task_id).

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": {
      "task_id": "<task_id>"
    },
    "name": "start_time_tracking"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`task_id`	Yes
`debug`	No

Output Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`data`	Yes
`metadata`	Yes	Metadata about the data itself
`summary`	Yes	Human-readable insights
`debug`	Yes
`success`	Yes
`api_version`	No		current
`response_version`	No		1.0

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv1.0.2Jun 10, 2026

TDQS

A4/5.0

Behavior3/5

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

No annotations provided, so description bears full burden. Mentions checking current status but does not disclose side effects (e.g., stopping previous tracking) or error conditions.

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?

Three sentences, front-loaded with purpose, then usage guidance. No unnecessary words, very efficient.

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?

Simple tool but description misses explanation of debug parameter and does not discuss preconditions (e.g., task must exist). Output schema fills some gaps but still incomplete.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters2/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema description coverage is 0%. The description only implies task_id but does not mention or explain the debug parameter, leaving a significant gap.

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?

Clear verb+resource: 'Start time tracking for a specific task.' Distinguishes from siblings like stop_time_tracking and get_currently_tracked_item.

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?

Explicitly states when to use ('when beginning focused work'), and provides clear pre- and post-usage steps (check status, stop tracking) with specific tool references.

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