Delete Timecard Entry

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

Beyond the destructiveHint annotation, the description discloses irreversibility ('cannot be undone'), repeat call behavior (404), common HTTP error scenarios (401, 403, 404), and the exact API endpoint. This is rich behavioral context that fully informs the agent of consequences.

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 moderately long but each sentence contributes meaningful information: action, prerequisite, irreversibility, error handling, required parameters, and API reference. Minor typos ('Detete') slightly detract, but structure is logical and front-loaded.

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?

With no output schema, the description covers prerequisite resolution, failure modes, and irreversibility, giving the agent enough context to use the tool safely. It omits success response details, but for a delete operation this is less critical given the thorough error coverage.

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 already describes both parameters (id as path parameter, project_id as query parameter). The description adds valuable guidance that id must resolve to an existing parent record and that both are required, going beyond the schema by explaining the prerequisite resolution.

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 uses a specific verb ('delete') and resource ('specific Timecard Entry'), clearly distinguishing this from list/update/show tools. It also states the irreversible effect ('Permanently removes the timecard entry'), reinforcing purpose.

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 instructs to confirm the target id with the matching show or list tool before calling and to resolve id with the matching list tool first. This provides clear when-to-use guidance, though it does not explicitly name alternative tools or exclusions.

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