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

No annotations are provided, so the description must carry the burden. It discloses that entries are created as Draft, the source range cannot exceed 31 days, and the weekday offset preservation logic. This is sufficient for a simple copy operation.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

The description is three sentences, efficiently conveying the purpose, behavioral details, and parameter usage without unnecessary words. It is front-loaded with the main action.

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

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

While there is no output schema, the description covers the input constraints and behavioral details adequately. It does not explain the return value, but for a copy operation, the outcome is implied (creation of draft entries). Could be improved by noting that existing entries in the target range are not overwritten.

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

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

All parameters are described in the input schema (100% coverage), and the description adds extra context about the mapping from source_start_date to target_start_date and the weekday offset, which goes beyond the schema's type/format descriptions.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description specifies a clear action: copying time entries from a source date range to a target date range, with the added detail of preserving weekday offset. This distinguishes it from siblings like log_time or create_time_report.

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

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

The description explains the use case (e.g., 'copy last week to this week') and constraints (31-day max), but does not explicitly state when not to use it or suggest alternative tools.

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