List time entries

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

Beyond the readOnlyHint and destructiveHint annotations, the description adds behavioral details: newest-first ordering, inclusion of a total, and defaulting to today when no date arguments are provided. This provides useful expectations without any contradictions.

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 concise sentences front-load the core purpose and key behavioral details. No wasted words, and the structure is clear and scannable.

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?

The description covers essential context: scope, date range, ordering, default behavior, and the total. With 13 parameters and no output schema, it could elaborate on return shape, but the provided information is sufficient for a list tool.

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 coverage is 100%, so all 13 parameters are described in the schema. The description adds minimal parameter-related meaning, only implying date-range and per-user filtering, which aligns with existing schema descriptions. This meets the baseline for full schema coverage.

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+resource+scope: 'Time entries for a person over a day or a range, newest first, with a total.' This clearly distinguishes it from siblings like clockify_get_time_entry (single entry) and clockify_time_summary (aggregate).

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 clear usage context: it filters by person and date range, defaults to today, and returns newest first. However, it does not explicitly mention when to prefer this over alternatives, so it lacks exclusion guidance.

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