delete_time_entry

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full behavioral burden. The word 'Permanently' is valuable — it discloses irreversibility, the single most important trait of a delete — but it omits permissions required, whether deletion is confirmed or can be undone, and any side effects on reported totals.

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 front-loaded sentence with zero waste; the most consequential word, 'Permanently', appears first.

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 one-parameter destructive tool with no annotations and no output schema, irreversibility is covered but confirmation behavior, error cases, and effects on aggregates are not. It is minimally sufficient to call correctly but thin for a permanent deletion.

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%, with `id` documented as 'The time entry ID to delete', so the baseline of 3 applies. The description adds no format or sourcing detail (e.g., where to obtain the ID) beyond the schema.

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?

States a specific verb and resource ('Permanently delete a time entry') that maps directly to the single `id` parameter. It is clearly distinct from siblings like update_time_entry or cancel_timer, though it never names an alternative explicitly.

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 delete versus cancel a timer or update an entry, and no mention of preconditions. The agent must infer usage entirely from the verb.

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