Remove Signature From Timecard Entry (Project)

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

Annotations indicate destructiveHint: true and readOnlyHint: false, which the description aligns with. The description adds behavioral context (moves records, returns updated object) but conflates two actions (removing signature and moving records), reducing clarity.

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 three sentences and fairly concise, but the second sentence introduces an unrelated action ('update existing Field Productivity records') that detracts from focus.

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 simple tool with two parameters and no output schema, the description covers the action, required parameters, and return value. However, the mixed messaging about updating vs removing leaves some uncertainty.

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?

Input schema has 100% coverage with descriptions for both parameters. The description redundantly states required parameters but adds no extra meaning beyond what the schema provides.

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 primary action: 'Remove the signature ID from the provided timecard entry.' This is a specific verb and resource. However, it also mentions updating Field Productivity records and moving them, which introduces ambiguity about the core function.

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 description says 'Use this to update an existing Field Productivity records' but does not explicitly specify when to use vs alternative tools or provide exclusion criteria. There is no mention of when not to use this tool.

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