toggl_delete_time_entry

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

The description mentions 'permanently,' indicating irreversibility, which is a key behavioral trait. However, it does not disclose other behaviors such as effects on running entries, cascading deletions, or error states. With no annotations, the description carries the full burden but falls short.

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 sentence of five words, very concise and front-loaded with the tool's purpose. It could be slightly more informative without losing conciseness, but it avoids unnecessary fluff.

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's simplicity (2 parameters, no output schema, no annotations), the description provides the core action and permanence. However, it omits details like idempotency, error scenarios, or impact on reports. It is minimally complete.

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?

The input schema already provides descriptions for both parameters ('Numeric workspace ID', 'Numeric time entry ID'), achieving 100% coverage. The description adds no additional parameter-level detail, so it meets but does not exceed the baseline.

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 tool's action: 'Delete a time entry permanently.' It specifies the verb (Delete) and the resource (time entry), making it distinct from siblings like update or stop.

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?

No guidance is given on when to use this tool vs. alternatives like toggl_stop_time_entry or toggl_update_time_entry. The description lacks context about prerequisites or scenarios where deletion is appropriate.

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