teamleader_timer_start

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden and does disclose a key side effect: starting a live timer that must be stopped. However, it does not address other important behaviors such as whether an existing timer is replaced, what happens if called while already running, or what the response contains.

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 two sentences, front-loading the purpose and then highlighting the side effect. It is compact, scannable, and every sentence earns its place.

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 the core purpose and the most important behavioral consequence (the live timer side effect). However, it lacks information about the return value, how to stop the timer via teamleader_timer_stop, and the distinction from manual time tracking entries. Given the absence of annotations and output schema, additional context would improve completeness.

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?

The schema already documents all four parameters, including the dependency between subject_id and subject_type. The description adds no parameter-specific meaning beyond what the schema provides, so the baseline score 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 clearly states the tool starts a running timer, which is specific and distinct from sibling tools like teamleader_timer_stop. However, it does not elaborate on the timer's relation to time tracking entries, which could further disambiguate from teamleader_time_tracking_add.

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 explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. The side effect note implies that the timer must be stopped, but it does not name teamleader_timer_stop as the corresponding action, nor does it mention manual time tracking alternatives.

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