Skip to main content
Glama
standardbeagle

Harvest MCP Server

harvest_time_report

Generate detailed time reports for specific date ranges with optional filtering by user, project, or client to track work hours and analyze productivity.

Instructions

Generate detailed time reports for date ranges. Use about {"tool": "harvest_time_report"} for filtering options and examples.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
fromYesStart date (YYYY-MM-DD)
toYesEnd date (YYYY-MM-DD)
user_idNoFilter by user ID
project_idNoFilter by project ID
client_idNoFilter by client ID

Implementation Reference

  • Core handler function that executes the Harvest API request for the time report using the /reports/time/team endpoint with dynamic query parameters from input.
    async getTimeReport(options?: any) {
      const queryString = this.buildQueryString(options);
      return this.makeRequest(`/reports/time/team${queryString}`);
    }
  • MCP server handler case that processes the tool call, invokes the client method, and formats the JSON response.
    case 'harvest_time_report':
      const timeReport = await harvestClient.getTimeReport(typedArgs);
      return {
        content: [
          {
            type: 'text',
            text: JSON.stringify(timeReport, null, 2),
          },
        ],
      };
  • Tool definition including name, description, and input schema for validation in the MCP server.
      name: 'harvest_time_report',
      description: 'Generate detailed time reports for date ranges. Use about {"tool": "harvest_time_report"} for filtering options and examples.',
      inputSchema: {
        type: 'object',
        properties: {
          from: { type: 'string', description: 'Start date (YYYY-MM-DD)' },
          to: { type: 'string', description: 'End date (YYYY-MM-DD)' },
          user_id: { type: 'string', description: 'Filter by user ID' },
          project_id: { type: 'string', description: 'Filter by project ID' },
          client_id: { type: 'string', description: 'Filter by client ID' }
        },
        required: ['from', 'to']
      }
    },
  • src/tools.ts:222-222 (registration)
    The tools array registers all MCP tools including harvest_time_report for server provision.
    ];
Behavior2/5

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 states the tool generates reports but doesn't describe what 'detailed' entails, output format, pagination, permissions required, rate limits, or whether it's read-only. The mention of the 'about' tool for examples adds some context but is insufficient for a mutation/read operation tool.

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 that directly address purpose and additional resources. It's front-loaded with the core function and avoids unnecessary elaboration. However, the second sentence could be more integrated with the tool's usage rather than being a standalone reference.

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 no annotations, no output schema, and 5 parameters (though well-documented in schema), the description is incomplete. It doesn't cover behavioral aspects like what 'detailed' reports include, output format, or how it differs from list tools. For a report-generation tool with filtering options, more context on results and usage is needed.

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?

Schema description coverage is 100%, so parameters are fully documented in the schema. The description adds no specific parameter semantics beyond implying date-range filtering and referencing the 'about' tool for examples. It doesn't explain parameter interactions or provide usage examples, meeting 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 tool's purpose: 'Generate detailed time reports for date ranges.' This specifies the action (generate), resource (time reports), and scope (date ranges). It distinguishes from siblings like harvest_list_time_entries by focusing on reports rather than raw entries, though it doesn't explicitly contrast with all alternatives.

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 minimal guidance: it mentions using the 'about' tool for filtering options and examples, but doesn't specify when to use this tool versus siblings like harvest_list_time_entries or harvest_list_users. No explicit when/when-not scenarios or alternative recommendations are provided, leaving usage context unclear.

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