Update Time Entry

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

Annotations already mark idempotentHint=true and destructiveHint=false. The description adds PATCH behavior and an example but no further behavioral context (e.g., permissions, error states). Annotations cover the safety profile, so a mid-range score 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 concise with two sentences plus an example. The bilingual duplication slightly reduces efficiency, but the key information is front-loaded.

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 presence of an output schema and 100% parameter coverage, the description adequately explains the tool's partial update behavior. It could mention error handling or prerequisites, but it is complete enough for typical use.

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 the description adds marginal value. The example illustrates usage of id, hours, description, but does not clarify parameter syntax beyond what the schema provides.

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 'Update an existing time entry using PATCH semantics' and provides a concrete example. This distinguishes it from sibling tools like create_time_entry, delete_time_entry, and list_time_entries.

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 PATCH semantics ('Only provided fields are changed'), which informs when to use this tool for partial updates. It does not explicitly exclude scenarios or name alternatives, but the context is clear for this resource.

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