View ticket time entry

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true, destructiveHint=false, and openWorldHint=true, so the safety profile is clear without the description. The description adds no further behavioral context such as not-found handling or permissions, but it does not contradict the annotations.

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 front-loaded sentence with no filler. It states the core operation immediately and is appropriately sized for a simple two-parameter read tool.

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 tool has rich annotations, 100% schema coverage, and an output schema, so the description need not explain return values or safety. It is nearly complete for a simple retrieval tool, though it could briefly clarify its relationship to list_ticket_time_entries.

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 required parameters documented in the schema. The description does not add meaning beyond the schema, such as how ticket_id and time_entry_id relate or where to obtain them, so the baseline 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 gives a specific verb and resource: 'Get one time entry on a ticket.' The word 'one' implies retrieval of a single entry rather than a list, which subtly distinguishes it from list_ticket_time_entries, but it does not name that sibling 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?

The description provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as list_ticket_time_entries, update_ticket_time_entry, or delete_ticket_time_entry. An agent must infer that this is the single-record lookup path from the name and required IDs alone.

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