peoplehub_log_hours

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

There are no annotations, so the description carries the transparency burden. It usefully discloses that this is a POST operation requiring confirm=true and that the API's total_horas field is expressed in minutes. However, it omits authentication needs, error behavior, and what happens on success or failure.

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?

Three short sentences, front-loaded with purpose and endpoint. Every sentence adds information: what the tool does, the confirmation requirement, and the API unit conversion. No filler or repetition.

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 12-parameter write operation with no annotations and no output schema, this description is not complete enough. It does not explain how to obtain valid activity/codigo/grupo values, whether a session is required, or what a successful submission returns. The confirm=true guard is helpful but does not fill the gaps.

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 description coverage is only 42%, so the description should compensate for undocumented parameters. It adds a valuable semantic fact: total_horas in the API is in minutes, which clarifies how hours/minutes are sent. But it gives no guidance for codigo, grupo_id, rework_id, ticket_cau, actividad_id, or subactividad_id.

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 action ('Registra horas en PeopleHub') and the exact endpoint (POST /api/time-report). It is easily distinguished from the sibling list/login/session tools, which do not write time entries.

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 intended use is obvious from 'Registra horas' and the endpoint, and it gives a concrete execution requirement (confirm=true). However, it does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives, nor mention prerequisites such as an active PeopleHub session.

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