timeiq_report_search_expenses

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

With no annotations, the description carries full burden. It states 'filter search' but does not disclose whether it is read-only, how results are paginated or sorted, or what happens when no entries match. Behavioral traits are largely absent.

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 efficiently short (one sentence) but lacks substance. It is not verbose, but conciseness should not come at the expense of completeness.

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 7 parameters (2 required), no output schema, and no annotations, the description is severely incomplete. It does not explain how filtering works, what the response format is, or any usage constraints.

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 0% and the description adds zero information about parameters. It does not explain the format or semantics of start_date, end_date, clients, projects, services, people, or extras.

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 ('perform filter search') and resource ('expense entries'), and specifies scope ('all'). It effectively distinguishes from sibling tools like timeiq_report_expenses which likely generate reports, not filter searches.

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?

No guidance on when to use this tool vs alternatives. Does not mention when not to use it or any prerequisites, such as requiring existing expense entries or date range constraints beyond required parameters.

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