list_time_entries

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

No annotations provided, so description carries full burden. It discloses read-only behavior ('list'), pagination, and filter constraints. Could be enhanced by noting reliance on current user/firm context or rate limits, but sufficient for a listing tool.

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, no fluff. Front-loaded with main action ('List time entries, paginated') followed by key detail. Every word earns its place.

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 an output schema (exists but not shown), description adequately covers purpose and main parameter nuance. Lacks explanation of pagination mechanics, but sufficient for a simple read tool among many CRUD siblings.

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 coverage is 0%, so description must add meaning. It explains 'matter_id' as a GUID filter, adding value. However, 'page' and 'page_size' are not elaborated beyond self-explanatory names and defaults, leaving some gaps.

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?

Description clearly states verb ('List') and resource ('time entries'), and specifies key features: pagination and optional matter_id filter. It distinguishes itself from siblings like 'get_time_entry' and 'create_time_entry'.

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?

Provides clear context: use when listing time entries with optional filter. Mentions the only server-side filter, offering guidance on limitations. Implicitly excludes single-entry retrieval (use 'get_time_entry') but lacks explicit when-not-to-use.

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