Update Kimai Timesheet

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

Discloses beyond annotations: the need for explicit authorization and the backup creation ('The existing record is saved to a temp backup file before the edit'). Annotations indicate non-read-only but the description adds critical safety context.

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 with no wasted words. First sentence states purpose; second adds critical behavioral info. Efficient and 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?

With 15 parameters and no output schema, the description covers the key safety and authorization aspects. It could mention return value or error handling but the detailed schema compensates.

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 has 100% coverage with individual parameter descriptions. The description adds no extra parameter detail beyond stating sensitivity, which aligns with authorization parameters. Baseline 3 is appropriate.

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 a Kimai timesheet record,' which is specific and identifies the resource. It also distinguishes the tool from siblings like create, stop, and restart by highlighting sensitivity.

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?

Explicitly states 'Sensitive edit: call only after explicit human authorization,' providing a clear when-not condition. While it doesn't name alternatives, the sensitivity context sufficiently guides usage.

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