Списать время

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It does not say whether the caller needs permissions, whether duplicate entries are allowed, how role_id affects the entry, or what the operation returns, beyond the fact that it is an additive write.

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?

Two short sentences with no filler, with the core action stated first. It is efficient, though it is minimal to the point of under-specification given the tool's write behavior.

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 five-parameter mutation tool with no annotations and no output schema, the description covers neither the result of the call nor how fields such as role_id, for_date, and comment affect the entry. It is too thin for a write operation with no supporting structured metadata.

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 all five parameters are already documented in the schema, including minimal units. The description only repeats that time_spent is in minutes, which adds no 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 states a clear verb and resource: it adds a time-tracking entry to a card. An agent can tell this apart from kaiten_list_time_logs and kaiten_delete_time_log by the verb alone, though no sibling is named explicitly.

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?

There is no guidance on when to use this tool versus the related kaiten_list_time_logs or kaiten_delete_time_log, and no prerequisites or exclusions are stated. The usage is only implied by the verb 'Добавляет'.

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