autotask_search_time_entries

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

No annotations provided, so description carries the burden. It discloses pagination (25 per page), API threshold concern, and filtering options. Lacks details on rate limits or read-only nature, but adds valuable behavior context.

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?

Three sentences: first states purpose and default page size, second lists filter types, third gives specific usage hint. No unnecessary words, front-loaded with key info.

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?

Given 10 parameters (none required), good schema coverage, and no output schema, the description covers pagination, filtering, and API threshold. It addresses the primary use case and potential pitfalls, making it complete and actionable.

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 90%, so baseline is 3. The description adds value beyond schema by highlighting the use of approvalStatus for unapproved entries and date range scoping to avoid API limits. The 'page' parameter lacks schema description, but the description compensates partially.

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 clearly states 'Search for time entries in Autotask' with specific verb and resource. It lists key filters (resource, ticket, project, date range, approval status) and default page size, distinguishing it from sibling search tools like autotask_search_tickets.

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?

Provides explicit usage advice: 'Use approvalStatus="unapproved" to find entries not yet posted' and 'Common fan-out target — scope by date range first to avoid Autotask's API threshold.' This tells the agent when and how to use the tool effectively.

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