kaiten_create_user_timer

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It only says 'create' and adds no context about side effects, whether an existing timer is affected, authorization requirements, or what happens after creation. The schema hint 'to start timer for' slightly implies behavior, but the description itself is minimal.

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 a single short sentence and is easy to scan. The word 'new' is slightly redundant with 'Create', but overall there is no wasted structure or excessive detail.

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 one-parameter create tool, the description and schema are minimally sufficient to make a call. However, with no annotations and no output schema, the definition lacks any information about the result, side effects, or conditions under which creation could fail, leaving meaningful gaps.

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 100%: the single parameter card_id is described as 'Card ID to start timer for'. The tool description restates the same idea without adding new meaning, so the baseline score of 3 applies.

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 ('Create'), the resource ('user timer'), and the target ('for a card'). This distinguishes it from sibling tools like kaiten_update_user_timer, kaiten_delete_user_timer, and kaiten_list_user_timers without needing to open the schema.

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 implies the use case: create a new timer rather than update or delete an existing one. However, it does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus its CRUD siblings, nor does it mention any prerequisites or conditions.

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