clokio_break_start

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

Annotations already indicate a non-read, non-destructive operation. The description adds no behavioral detail beyond the tautological 'start' – it does not mention side effects like creating a time entry, requirements like an active shift, or failure conditions if a break is already running.

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?

A single concise sentence that states the action directly with no filler. The core verb and object are front-loaded, which makes it easy to parse.

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?

The description is insufficient for an agent to invoke this tool correctly. It does not explain the relationship to clokio_clock_in or clokio_break_end, does not specify whether pin is required for all calls, and provides no information about expected return values or failure modes. Given the 0% schema coverage and no output schema, the description needed to carry much more context.

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?

Schema description coverage is 0% for both 'pin' and 'employee_code'. The description only mentions 'employee', which loosely maps to employee_code, but leaves 'pin' completely unexplained. Since the schema provides no descriptions, the tool description was required to compensate and does not.

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 'Start a break for an employee' uses a specific verb and resource, clearly distinguishing this from sibling tools like clokio_break_end ('end') and clock_in/clock_out. An agent can immediately recognize the action and target.

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?

There is no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives, no mention of prerequisites (e.g., employee must be clocked in), and no note about pairing with clokio_break_end. The lone sentence states the action but gives no selection criteria or timing context.

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