redmine_time_entry_get

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. The GET method implies a read-only, non-destructive operation, but no further details are given about error handling, response format, or side effects. It adds minimal behavioral context beyond the HTTP method.

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, front-loaded sentence with no extraneous content. It states the purpose first and includes the endpoint for additional clarity, achieving maximum conciseness without sacrificing information.

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 (one parameter, no output schema, no annotations), the description is minimally sufficient but not comprehensive. It does not describe the return value or potential errors, which an agent might need to know. However, for a basic GET-by-id operation, the description provides enough to call it correctly.

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 schema has 0% description coverage, so the description should compensate. It does not mention the 'id' parameter at all, nor its meaning beyond what the schema already provides. The endpoint includes ':id', making it inferable, but the description adds no explicit semantics for the parameter.

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 verb 'Get' and the resource 'time entry', and specifies the exact API endpoint. It is unambiguous and distinguishes from sibling tools like redmine_time_entries_list (listing) and create/update/delete by indicating a single-resource retrieval.

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 (when you have an id and need a single time entry) but does not explicitly contrast with alternatives such as redmine_time_entries_list. No conditions or exclusions are mentioned, so the guidance is only implicit.

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