list_worklogs

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the burden. It discloses pagination behavior via cursor but does not explicitly state that the operation is read-only or mention any side effects, rate limits, or permissions. For a list operation, this is acceptable but not fully transparent.

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 two sentences, front-loaded with the key verb and resource, then adds filtering and pagination details. Every sentence serves a purpose with no unnecessary words.

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?

The tool has no output schema, so the description should help infer the response structure. It mentions pagination and filtering but does not describe the work log fields returned or the pagination format (e.g., edges, nodes). This leaves some ambiguity for the agent.

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 100% with each parameter described (cursor, assigneeId, externalItemId). The description adds that filtering is by 'assignee or Jira issue,' which aligns with the parameters but does not provide additional meaning beyond the schema.

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 the specific verb 'List' with 'work logs from 7pace,' clearly identifying the resource and action. It mentions filtering by assignee or Jira issue, which distinguishes it from sibling tools like get_worklog (single) and log_time (create).

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 states it supports filtering and pagination, implying usage for listing multiple logs with optional filters. However, it does not explicitly say when not to use it (e.g., for a single log use get_worklog), but the sibling context makes it clear.

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