wrike_list_timelogs

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure, but it does not explain return format, pagination, ordering, or whether this is a read-only operation. While 'List' implies a read, there is no explicit statement about side effects or limits. The description adds no behavioral context beyond the bare action.

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, concise sentence that conveys the core purpose. It is appropriately sized for a simple list operation, though it could include a bit more structure, such as mentioning what is returned.

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?

Given the tool has 13 optional parameters and no output schema or annotations, the description is insufficiently complete. It does not mention what the returned data looks like, whether there are any defaults or limitations, or how to interpret the filters. A more complete description would clarify the output and usage 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 100%, so each of the 13 parameters is already documented with its own description. The description adds 'optional filters', which aligns with the schema but does not provide additional meaning. This meets the baseline for high schema coverage.

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 and resource: 'List time logs', which clearly indicates the tool's function. It also mentions 'optional filters', giving a hint of its scope. However, it does not explicitly distinguish this tool from siblings like wrike_get_timelog, so it misses the highest mark.

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 offers no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as wrike_get_timelog (for a single log) or wrike_list_timelog_categories. It only states what it does, leaving the agent to infer usage from the name and schema.

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