kaiten_delete_time_log

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

There are no annotations, so the description carries the transparency burden. It discloses a key behavioral restriction ('author only') beyond what the name alone conveys. It does not explicitly state permanence or side effects, but for a delete operation the action and permission constraint are reasonably 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 a single compact sentence with no filler. It front-loads the action and resource, then adds the important authorization caveat in a parenthetical.

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 two-parameter delete operation with no output schema, the description is complete enough: it names the resource, target, and permission constraint. A minor gap is that it does not explicitly note that deletion is permanent or how to obtain the time_log_id, but these are inferable and not blocking.

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%, and both card_id and time_log_id already have clear descriptions in the input schema. The tool description adds no additional parameter-level meaning, so the baseline of 3 is appropriate.

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 states a specific verb ('Delete'), a specific resource ('a time log entry'), and the containing context ('from a card'). It also adds the 'author only' restriction, which clearly distinguishes this deletion tool from create/update/list time-log siblings and from kaiten_delete_user_timer.

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 gives a clear usage constraint: only the author may delete the time log. It does not name explicit alternatives, but the wording makes the intended use obvious among the time-log related sibling tools, and the 'author only' condition is a useful when-to-use signal.

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