get_time_entry

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

With no annotations, the description carries the burden of disclosing behavior. The verb 'Show' implies a read-only, non-destructive operation, but it does not disclose error handling, permission requirements, or any side effects. This is adequate for a simple get tool but lacks depth.

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 extremely concise, front-loading the purpose ('Show a time entry's details') and following with a compact Args section. Every sentence earns its place, with no redundant or filler content.

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 single-parameter get tool with an output schema, the description is appropriately complete. It states the purpose and provides a practical usage hint, while the output schema handles return-value documentation. No additional context is needed given the low complexity.

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 0%, but the description adds meaningful guidance by explaining the parameter is a time entry ID and recommending 'use list_time_entries' to obtain it. This goes beyond the schema's raw type definition, though it does not fully compensate for the lack of schema descriptions.

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 uses a specific verb ('Show') and resource ('a time entry's details'), clearly indicating a retrieval operation. It implicitly distinguishes from sibling tools like list_time_entries (listing), log_time (creating), and update_time_entry (modifying), but does not explicitly name these alternatives.

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 instruction 'use list_time_entries' provides a practical hint for obtaining the time_entry_id, implying a sequential workflow. However, it does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus others, nor does it describe exclusions or alternative approaches.

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