beebole_get_time_entries

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

No annotations are present, so the description must cover behavioral disclosure. It indicates a read operation ('returns') but lacks details on authentication, rate limits, pagination, error behavior, or response format. The simplicity of the tool partially mitigates this, but additional context would improve transparency.

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?

Two sentences, front-loaded with the core purpose, no unnecessary words. Efficient and to the point.

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?

The description is adequate for a simple date-range filter but does not describe the output format or provide details on what data is returned. No output schema exists, so the description should offer more context on the response. However, the tool is straightforward, and the schema covers parameters completely.

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 coverage is 100%, with both parameters fully described in the schema (type, pattern, required). The description adds little beyond the schema, only reinforcing the date format and purpose. Baseline 3 is appropriate as the schema carries the burden.

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 it returns time entries between two dates, specifying the date format (YYYY-MM-DD). It also mentions usefulness for hour analysis by project and deviations, distinguishing it from sibling tools that handle projects, tasks, or logging time.

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 implies usage for analysis but does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives. No when-not or alternative tool references are provided, though sibling tools are different in function.

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