Удалить списание времени

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full disclosure burden for a destructive operation. It says the record is deleted but omits whether the deletion is permanent, what permissions are required, and whether any related card totals are recalculated. For an irreversible mutation with zero annotation coverage, this is a substantial gap.

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?

A single efficient sentence with no filler, and the destructive verb is front-loaded. It is under-specified rather than verbose, which the other dimensions already capture.

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 destructive, two-parameter mutation with no annotations and no output schema, the description should at minimum flag irreversibility and any required permissions. Instead it offers one bare sentence, leaving the agent without the behavioral context needed to invoke it responsibly.

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%, with both card_id and time_log_id documented in the schema, so the baseline of 3 applies. The description adds no additional semantics such as how to source these IDs or whether time_log_id is scoped to card_id.

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 and resource ('Удаляет запись учёта времени с карточки'), which clearly identifies a deletion of a time-log entry tied to a card. It is distinguishable from kaiten_add_time_log and kaiten_list_time_logs by the verb alone, though it never explicitly names those siblings.

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 kaiten_add_time_log, kaiten_list_time_logs, or how to obtain the required time_log_id. No prerequisites, no exclusions, no mention of consequences — the agent must infer everything from the name.

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