Create Timelog

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

Annotations already convey that this is a write operation (readOnlyHint=false) and not idempotent. The description adds a useful verification gesture, but it does not disclose side effects like duplicate entries, response behavior, or any permission requirements. This is adequate given the annotation coverage, but not rich.

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 a single compact sentence that front-loads the core action, then packs three useful instructions into a short clause chain. There is no filler or redundant repetition of schema information.

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?

For a moderate-complexity creation tool with no output schema, the description covers the essential parameter provenance and verification workflow. It does not explain return values or explicitly distinguish itself from update/delete siblings, but the schema plus annotations already carry sufficient operational detail.

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?

The schema covers 100% of parameters, so the baseline is 3. The description adds extra semantic value by telling the agent where to obtain roleId and cardId and recommending verification via kaiten_get_card_timelogs, which goes beyond the schema's field-level 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 states a specific verb-resource pair: 'Log time (in minutes) on a card.' It also specifies the unit (minutes) and identifies the target resource (card), which distinguishes it from unrelated card, comment, or file tools. Though it doesn't explicitly contrast with update_timelog, the action is unambiguous.

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 provides explicit prerequisite sourcing: 'roleId from kaiten_list_company_roles; cardId from kaiten_search_cards' and a verification step via kaiten_get_card_timelogs. It gives clear context for how to call the tool, but it does not explicitly state when to use this tool instead of update_timelog or delete_timelog.

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