Skip to main content
Glama
standardbeagle

Harvest MCP Server

harvest_create_time_entry

Create time entries in Harvest to track work hours on specific projects and tasks, enabling accurate time management and reporting.

Instructions

Create a new time entry. Use about {"tool": "harvest_create_time_entry"} for detailed parameters and examples.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
project_idYesProject ID
task_idYesTask ID
spent_dateYesDate of the entry (YYYY-MM-DD)
hoursNoHours worked
notesNoNotes for the time entry

Implementation Reference

  • Core implementation of the tool: makes POST request to Harvest API /time_entries endpoint with the provided data.
    async createTimeEntry(data: any) {
      return this.makeRequest('/time_entries', {
        method: 'POST',
        body: JSON.stringify(data),
      });
    }
  • MCP server dispatch handler: receives tool call and invokes HarvestClient.createTimeEntry, formats response.
    case 'harvest_create_time_entry':
      const newTimeEntry = await harvestClient.createTimeEntry(typedArgs);
      return {
        content: [
          {
            type: 'text',
            text: JSON.stringify(newTimeEntry, null, 2),
          },
        ],
      };
  • src/tools.ts:20-34 (registration)
    Tool registration: defines name, description, and input schema for harvest_create_time_entry.
    {
      name: 'harvest_create_time_entry',
      description: 'Create a new time entry. Use about {"tool": "harvest_create_time_entry"} for detailed parameters and examples.',
      inputSchema: {
        type: 'object',
        properties: {
          project_id: { type: 'string', description: 'Project ID' },
          task_id: { type: 'string', description: 'Task ID' },
          spent_date: { type: 'string', description: 'Date of the entry (YYYY-MM-DD)' },
          hours: { type: 'number', description: 'Hours worked' },
          notes: { type: 'string', description: 'Notes for the time entry' }
        },
        required: ['project_id', 'task_id', 'spent_date']
      }
    },
  • Input schema definition: specifies required and optional parameters with types and descriptions.
    {
      name: 'harvest_create_time_entry',
      description: 'Create a new time entry. Use about {"tool": "harvest_create_time_entry"} for detailed parameters and examples.',
      inputSchema: {
        type: 'object',
        properties: {
          project_id: { type: 'string', description: 'Project ID' },
          task_id: { type: 'string', description: 'Task ID' },
          spent_date: { type: 'string', description: 'Date of the entry (YYYY-MM-DD)' },
          hours: { type: 'number', description: 'Hours worked' },
          notes: { type: 'string', description: 'Notes for the time entry' }
        },
        required: ['project_id', 'task_id', 'spent_date']
      }
    },
Behavior2/5

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It states this is a creation tool, implying a write operation, but doesn't mention potential side effects (e.g., whether it affects billing, requires permissions, or has rate limits). It also doesn't describe the response format or error conditions, leaving the agent with incomplete behavioral understanding.

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?

The description is concise with two sentences, front-loading the core purpose. However, the second sentence referencing 'about' for details is somewhat redundant since the schema already provides parameter information, slightly reducing efficiency. Overall, it's well-structured with minimal waste.

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?

Given the complexity (a write operation with 5 parameters), no annotations, and no output schema, the description is incomplete. It doesn't cover behavioral aspects like authentication needs, error handling, or what the tool returns upon success. For a creation tool in a time-tracking context, this leaves significant gaps for the agent.

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

Parameters3/5

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

The schema description coverage is 100%, so the schema already documents all 5 parameters with clear descriptions (e.g., 'Date of the entry (YYYY-MM-DD)'). The description adds no additional parameter semantics beyond what's in the schema, such as explaining relationships between parameters (e.g., project_id and task_id must correspond). This meets the baseline for high schema coverage.

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 action ('Create a new time entry') and resource ('time entry'), which is specific and unambiguous. It distinguishes from siblings like harvest_update_time_entry or harvest_delete_time_entry by focusing on creation. However, it doesn't explicitly differentiate from all siblings (e.g., harvest_restart_timer might also involve time tracking).

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

Usage Guidelines2/5

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 alternatives. It doesn't mention prerequisites (e.g., needing valid project/task IDs), when not to use it (e.g., for updating existing entries), or direct alternatives like harvest_update_time_entry. The reference to 'about' is for parameter details, not usage context.

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/standardbeagle/harvest-mcp'

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