Update Worklog

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

Annotations set readOnlyHint to false, confirming this is a write operation. The description adds no further behavioral context, such as whether fields are overwritten or merged, or any side effects. With annotations covering the read/write nature, the description provides minimal additional transparency.

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 with no wasted words. It is appropriately concise for its purpose, though it could be slightly more informative without sacrificing brevity.

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?

Given the tool has 5 parameters and an output schema (not shown), the description lacks information about return values, partial updates, or error conditions. It is minimally adequate for a simple update tool but leaves room for more context.

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%, so each parameter is already documented. The description adds 'spent time record' context but no parameter-specific details beyond the schema. Baseline score 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 clearly states the verb 'Update' and the resource 'worklog entry (spent time record)' in Yandex Tracker. It distinguishes from siblings by specifying 'update' rather than 'add' or 'delete', but does not explicitly differentiate from other update tools like issue_update.

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 provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as issue_add_worklog or issue_delete_worklog. An agent would need to infer usage from the name alone.

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