Create a time entry

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

Beyond annotations (readOnlyHint=false, destructiveHint=true which seems contradictory), the description adds critical behavioral context: dry-run default, confirmation requirement, and mode-dependent body shape. This helps the agent understand the non-standard create process.

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 sentences, front-loaded with core action, then process, then mode dependency. No wasted words; every sentence adds essential 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 12 parameters and no output schema, the description covers the key complexities (dry-run, mode, defaults). Omits details on some optional params (tag_ids, project_id, etc.) but those are documented in schema. Lacks description of the preview object, but the existence of a preview is mentioned.

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?

Adds meaning beyond schema: purpose defaults to 'work', date defaults to Europe/Amsterdam today, and clarifies when start/end or hours are needed. Schema coverage is 58%, so description compensates well by explaining contextual requirements.

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 'Create a new time entry' and provides specific details about dry-run behavior and mode-dependent parameters, distinguishing it from sibling tools like list, update, delete, and timer operations.

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 explains the two-step process: first dry-run for preview, then confirm with human review. Also clarifies when to use start/end vs hours based on org timesheet mode. No explicit exclusion of alternatives, but the context is clear.

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