Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
solidtime-mcp

solidtime-mcp

by si-essence
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Remote

solidtime_time_entry_update

Idempotent

Update a time entry's details, tags, or billable status, and set an end time to stop a running timer. Omit confirm to preview changes as a dry run.

Instructions

Update a time entry. PUT .../time-entries/{timeEntry}. Set end to stop a running timer. Omit confirm for a dry-run.

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": {
      "time_entry_id": "<time_entry_id>"
    },
    "name": "solidtime_time_entry_update"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
endNo
tagsNo
typeNo
startNoUTC timestamp like "2000-02-22T14:58:59Z".
confirmNoSet to the boolean true to execute the write. Omit this field for a dry-run preview. false and the string true are rejected.
task_idNo
billableNo
member_idNo
project_idNo
descriptionNo
time_entry_idYes
organization_idNoOrganization UUID. Falls back to SOLIDTIME_ORGANIZATION_ID, then a single membership from GET /v1/users/me/memberships.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv0.1.0

TDQS

B3.1/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

Annotations already declare destructiveHint=false, idempotentHint=true and openWorldHint=true, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds one genuinely useful behavior (setting end stops a running timer) plus the dry-run/confirm gate. It omits a significant trait: the endpoint is PUT, which usually implies full replacement, yet nothing says whether omitted fields are cleared or preserved.

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?

Three terse sentences, front-loaded with the core action; every clause carries information. The bare URL fragment is marginally redundant with the tool name but helps confirm the HTTP semantics.

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

Completeness2/5

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

For a 12-parameter mutation with no output schema and 25% schema coverage, this is thin: it does not cover partial-update semantics, the role of organization_id fallback, required permissions, or what the response contains. It correctly handles the confirm dry-run gate but leaves too many parameters unaccounted for.

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 only 25% across 12 parameters, so the description bears most of the explanatory burden but clarifies only `end` and `confirm`. The nullability of tags, task_id, project_id and description, and the meaning of type=break, member_id, and billable go unexplained in both places.

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?

States a specific verb and resource ("Update a time entry") and pins the endpoint as PUT .../time-entries/{timeEntry}, so it is distinguishable from the sibling bulk update and create tools by singularity. It does not explicitly name those siblings as alternatives, which keeps it short of a 5.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines3/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

Gives two concrete usage cues: set end to stop a running timer, and omit confirm for a dry-run. However, it never says when to use this versus solidtime_time_entry_create, solidtime_time_entries_bulk_update, or solidtime_timer_stop, all of which can plausibly mutate an entry's state.

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

Deploy Server

Other Tools