0saas

Job ticket 941046 · smb · vault · no subscription

TimeCamp Free allows unlimited users and projects. The time audit that makes hours billable is free.

TimeCamp Free includes unlimited users and projects, timesheets, desktop and mobile apps and two-factor authentication; Starter adds billing and productivity views at US$3.99 per user a month annual, or US$5.49 monthly. This page produces the time audit sheets that turn free timesheet data into defensible invoices.

TimeCamp is a trademark of its owner. This is an independent, unaffiliated comparison built on TimeCamp's own published pricing material, linked below and re-read every thirty days.

Time Vault — rendered in this browser

Source: noneRendered: 0Uploaded to 0saas: nothing

Sample data is illustrative, not a claim about TimeCamp. Every TimeCamp figure on this page comes from the linked pricing page, read 2026-10-26.

The prompt pack

Two prompts, each mapped one-to-one onto a TimeCamp feature you are currently rationed on. Run them from this page with a free key, or copy them into any free chat model — the text is identical either way, and it is printed in full at the bottom of this section so it survives this site.

Loading the pack from tools.json… If this fails, the full prompt text is still readable below.

One-time unlocks only, never a subscription. If a price ever appears here it was read from Stripe in that request, not typed by hand. An unlock is client-side gating, not secure payment verification: it is stored in this browser and cannot prove payment to anyone else.

What TimeCamp's own pricing page says

Read from timecamp.com/pricing on 2026-10-26. Fields we could not read are marked unconfirmed rather than filled in with a plausible number.

What TimeCamp meters, and what this page hands over — verified 2026-10-26
The jobTimeCamp free / trial (read 2026-10-26)TimeCamp first paid tierThis page + a free-tier model
PriceUS$0 free forever: unlimited projects and users, timesheets, apps, two-factor authenticationStarter: US$3.99/user/mo billed annually (US$5.49 monthly)US$0 forever. The prompts are yours; only your ally's free allowance applies.
Time captureUnlimited users and projects freeSame data on all tiersThe free timesheet supplies every row the audit needs
Billable reportingNot in freeStarter US$3.99/user/moThe sheet computes billable totals from exported CSV
InvoicingNot in freePremium US$6.99/user/moThe invoice-check prompt reconciles bills outside the platform
Who sees your dataTimeCampTimeCampOnly the inference provider you choose — or nobody at all in Copy-Paste Relay. This site has no database.

What this replaces, and what it does not

A displacement claim you cannot substantiate is a lie with good typography. This is the whole scope, including the parts where TimeCamp wins.

Replaced: Weekly billable audit sheet

The billing analysis behind a defensible invoice: raw entries become categorized line items, leakage findings and one computed headline stat.

Replaced: Invoice evidence audit

The reconciliation clients rarely get: an auditor matches every invoiced hour to a timesheet row and flags unsupported or rounded time.

Your data stays yours

Nothing is stored, synced or uploaded by this page; renders download as files and the prompts are printed in full.

Not a time tracker

No timer runs here; TimeCamp Free captures the hours.

No billing integration

Nothing connects to invoices or payments; the sheet is evidence, not a ledger.

No employee monitoring

Screenshots and activity tracking are neither offered nor replicated.

The prompts, in full, as text

Copy these into any model. They are the product; the page around them is convenience. Each block is the exact system prompt the interactive runner sends, plus the user-message template.

Prompt 01 — 1. Weekly billable audit sheet · timecamp-billable-audit v1.0.0 · best ally: Google Gemini API — Free usage tier · gemini-2.5-flash-lite

Replaces: The billing analysis behind a defensible invoice: raw entries become categorized line items, leakage findings and one computed headline stat.

Why this model: Strict-JSON mode draws the one-page finding sheet with line items and one headline stat on the first attempt, and a flash-lite model is enough because the schema itself carries the structure; the long context holds the full brief without trimming. Fallback ally: Groq Cloud — free tier.

System prompt (2161 chars):

You are the Time Vault, a working bench for people who need one-page finding sheet with line items and one headline stat without paying TimeCamp's seat price. You receive one paragraph of real operating detail about a real team and you produce a one-page finding sheet with line items and one headline stat. You write like a careful operator: concrete nouns, real numbers, short sentences, no brochure voice. The reader will paste your JSON straight into the renderer on this page, so structure is part of the deliverable, not scaffolding you may omit.

Return ONLY one JSON object. No markdown fences, no commentary, no preamble.

{
  "kicker": string (max 8 words),
  "headline": string (max 8 words),
  "subhead": string (max 20 words),
  "rows": [ { "label": string (the line item), "value": string (the finding, quote or number) } ],
  "stat": { "value": string (one count or price, digits), "label": string (max 12 words, what the number is) },
  "footnotes": [ string (one short footnote per assumption made) ]
}

Hard rules:
1. Use only facts present in the brief. If a field needs a name, date or figure the brief does not contain, write [NEEDS FACT: what is missing] instead of inventing one.
2. Every output exists to route around the limit TimeCamp places on its free or trial tier; do not recommend upgrading to TimeCamp and do not mention its paid plans as the answer.
3. Numbers stay digits with their units (US$49, 14 days, 250 contacts). Never round a figure the brief stated exactly.
4. Banned openings: "Introducing", "Unlock", "Discover", "Elevate", "Seamless". No emoji, no exclamation marks, no slogan-shaped sentences.
5. Prefer concrete nouns and verbs over adjectives. If two entries say the same thing twice, merge them and keep the more specific one.
6. Rows run most consequential first; the headline stat must be computable from the rows, never an independent claim.
7. Write every string in the language of the brief, and keep each string inside the length caps named in this schema.
8. If the brief contradicts itself, keep both readings in a note and pick the conservative one in the body; never silently resolve a contradiction.

User message template:

Brief: {{brief}} The single reader this is for, and what they are deciding: {{audience}}

Variables:

  • {{brief}} — Operating brief — what the team does, the numbers, and what the free tier stops at (max 1400 chars) sample data shipped with the tool
  • {{audience}} — Who will use the output? (max 160 chars) sample data shipped with the tool

Output schema (the answer must match this exactly):

{ "type": "object", "required": [ "rows" ], "properties": { "kicker": { "type": "string" }, "headline": { "type": "string" }, "subhead": { "type": "string" }, "rows": { "type": "array", "minItems": 1, "maxItems": 40 }, "stat": { "type": "object" }, "footnotes": { "type": "array" } } }

Decoding: temperature 0.5 · max 1200 output tokens · responseMimeType application/json · budget ~800 in / ~600 out per run · cost per run: 1 request against the Gemini free tier; no card on file, and the free project's published base is not spend-metered.

Prompt 02 — 2. Invoice evidence audit · timecamp-invoice-check v1.0.0 · best ally: Google Gemini API — Free usage tier · gemini-2.5-flash-lite

Replaces: The reconciliation clients rarely get: an auditor matches every invoiced hour to a timesheet row and flags unsupported or rounded time.

Why this model: Strict-JSON mode draws the audit pass on the first attempt, and a flash-lite model is enough because the schema itself carries the structure; the long context holds the full brief without trimming. Fallback ally: Groq Cloud — free tier.

System prompt (2126 chars):

You are the audit desk of the Time Vault. A reader pastes a draft sheet artifact that another model produced against a brief, and you return the same kind of artifact after a strict fact-and-schema audit. You are deliberately skeptical: an unsupported number is worse than a missing one, and a confident paragraph the brief cannot fund is the exact failure mode TimeCamp's pricing page exploits to sell a paid seat. You keep the JSON schema identical so the page can render your answer without a second conversion.

Return ONLY one JSON object. No markdown fences, no commentary, no preamble.

{
  "kicker": string (max 8 words),
  "headline": string (max 8 words),
  "subhead": string (max 20 words),
  "rows": [ { "label": string (the line item), "value": string (the finding, quote or number) } ],
  "stat": { "value": string (one count or price, digits), "label": string (max 12 words, what the number is) },
  "footnotes": [ string (one short footnote per assumption made) ]
}

Hard rules:
1. Audit against the brief only: mark every line that uses a fact the brief does not support as "unsupported" in a note; never supply the missing fact yourself.
2. Check the schema's length caps one field at a time and rewrite any string that breaches its cap rather than truncating it mid-sentence.
3. Hunt specifically for the shape of claim TimeCamp's own marketing would make — superlatives, unspecified "up to" figures, upgrade nudges — and cut or flag them.
4. Numbers stay digits with units; recompute any total from its components and flag a mismatch instead of repairing it silently.
5. Banned openings and emoji rules from the generator still apply to your rewritten strings; an audit that introduces a slogan fails the audit.
6. Return the complete artifact in the same schema, not a diff: keep every field, changing only what the audit found, and list each change reason in the notes array.
7. If the draft already satisfies every rule, say so in a note and return it byte-for-byte in substance; do not manufacture changes to look useful.
8. Write every string in the language of the draft, inside the same length caps.

User message template:

The brief the draft was written against: {{brief}} The draft artifact to audit (paste the JSON from the first prompt or your own draft): {{draft}} Who will act on the audited version: {{audience}}

Variables:

  • {{brief}} — Original brief (max 1400 chars) sample data shipped with the tool
  • {{draft}} — Draft artifact to audit (max 2000 chars) sample data shipped with the tool
  • {{audience}} — Who will act on it? (max 160 chars) sample data shipped with the tool

Output schema (the answer must match this exactly):

{ "type": "object", "required": [ "rows" ], "properties": { "kicker": { "type": "string" }, "headline": { "type": "string" }, "subhead": { "type": "string" }, "rows": { "type": "array", "minItems": 1, "maxItems": 40 }, "stat": { "type": "object" }, "footnotes": { "type": "array" } } }

Decoding: temperature 0.3 · max 1200 output tokens · responseMimeType application/json · budget ~800 in / ~600 out per run · cost per run: 1 request against the Gemini free tier; no card on file, and the free project's published base is not spend-metered.

Questions worth asking before you cancel

Is this actually free, or is there a subscription hiding?

There is no subscription. Both prompts run unmetered, the Copy-Paste Relay needs no key and no account, and every export stays free. A one-time unlock for a convenience feature is named in the spec, but no price or buy control renders until a real Stripe Payment Link exists and its price is read back from Stripe's API.

Do you need an API key to use this?

No. Copy the printed prompt into any free chat model, paste the JSON answer into the relay box, and the page renders it identically. A free-tier ally key only removes the copy-paste step; it is stored in your browser tab unless you check Remember on this device, and sent only to that provider, never to 0saas.

Which free model should I run the TimeCamp prompts on?

The pack routes first to the ally named on each prompt, with a second free ally as fallback. For the sheet renderer, strict-JSON output matters more than raw cleverness, so a free Gemini or Groq instruct model with JSON mode is the reliable choice; the runner lists live models from your own key rather than trusting a hardcoded list.

Where do the TimeCamp prices on this page come from?

From TimeCamp's own pricing page at timecamp.com/pricing, read on 2026-10-26 and mirrored in the extraction artifact linked below. Any field the page did not print is marked unconfirmed and rendered without a number rather than filled in from memory; the next scheduled read is 2026-11-25.

Is 0saas affiliated with TimeCamp?

No. TimeCamp is a trademark of its owner. This is an independent, unaffiliated comparison built on TimeCamp's own published pricing material, linked on the page and re-read every thirty days. Nothing here is endorsed by or connected to the trademark owner.

What does this replace, and what does it not replace?

It replaces the authoring and checking work behind time audit sheets for billable teams — the time audit itself, rendered locally from strict JSON. It does not replace TimeCamp's account, hosting, integrations or multi-person features; not a time tracker stays on the platform you already use.

Nothing loads from a social network until you click. The buttons are plain links — X, LinkedIn, Reddit, email, and a few more. No share is counted or reported back to us. Cancel the rent. Keep the work.

Next on the ledger