beebole_log_time

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

No annotations were provided, so the description bears full responsibility. It discloses that the tool performs a write (es una escritura) and requires user confirmation, which is critical behavioral information. However, it does not elaborate on potential side effects, permissions, or whether it updates existing entries, leaving some aspects unspecified.

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 extremely concise with two sentences, no redundant information. The first sentence states the main action, the second provides a critical usage guideline (confirmation). It is front-loaded and every word adds value.

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 simple write tool with no output schema, the description covers the essential aspects: what it does, the unit for duration, and the need for confirmation. It does not specify the return value or error handling, but given the tool's simplicity and the clarity of the schema, the description is sufficiently 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 has 100% description coverage, so the description adds no new meaning beyond the schema. The only extra detail is 'duration en MINUTOS' which is already present in the schema as 'Duración en minutos'. Thus, the description does not enhance parameter understanding.

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 'Registra horas en un proyecto' (log hours in a project) with a specific verb and resource. The mention of 'duration en MINUTOS' and the instruction to confirm before use further clarify the action. The write nature distinguishes it from sibling tools like get_time_entries (read) and list_projects/list_tasks (listing).

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 explicitly instructs the agent to ask user confirmation before using, indicating that it is a write operation that should not be executed automatically. While it does not explicitly state when not to use it, the write vs. read distinction is implied by the confirmation directive and the sibling tools context.

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