List Time Entries

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true, destructiveHint=false, fully covering safety and idempotency. The description adds filter context but does not reveal additional behavioral traits (e.g., pagination behavior, sorting defaults). With strong annotations, a score of 3 is appropriate.

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 bilingual (English and Spanish), which doubles its length but is a common pattern for multilingual tools. It is front-loaded with the English purpose and use cases, then repeats in Spanish. While not excessively long, it could be more concise by omitting the Spanish if a single language suffices for the agent.

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 an output schema exists (as indicated by context), the description does not need to explain return values. It covers purpose, filters, and use cases adequately. For a simple list tool with strong annotations, it provides sufficient context to use the tool effectively.

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 8 parameters have descriptions in the input schema (100% coverage), so the tool description does not need to add parameter-level details. The description merely mentions filter categories, which aligns with the schema. Baseline 3 is appropriate.

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 clearly states the verb 'List' and resource 'time tracking entries', specifies optional filters (user, project, date range, billable status), and lists use cases (timesheets, billing, cost analysis). This differentiates it from sibling tools like get_time_entry and get_time_summary.

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 context on when to use the tool (generating timesheets, billing reports, project cost analysis) but does not explicitly state when not to use it or mention alternative tools. However, the purpose is clear enough for an agent to decide.

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