rm_get_time_entry

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

The description says the operation is read-only ('Get details'), which aligns with the annotations readOnlyHint=true and destructiveHint=false. However, it does not add behavioral context beyond what the annotations already communicate, so a baseline score is appropriate.

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 or redundant detail. Every word contributes to understanding the tool's purpose and primary input.

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 simple get-by-id operation with one parameter, annotations indicating a safe read-only action, and an output schema available, the description covers everything needed to invoke the tool correctly. No crucial information is missing.

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%, so the description should ideally compensate. It does clarify that entry_id is the identifier of the time entry, but this largely restates the parameter's name and title. With only one simple parameter, this is minimally sufficient but adds little semantic depth.

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 ('Get') and a clear resource ('details for a specific time entry'), plus the selection criterion 'by its ID.' This cleanly distinguishes it from sibling tools like rm_list_time_entries, rm_update_time_entry, and rm_delete_time_entry.

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 phrase 'by its ID' clearly conveys that this tool is used when the agent already has the entry_id and needs details for a single time entry. It does not explicitly discuss alternatives or when not to use it, but the context is clear enough for correct selection among the sibling time-entry tools.

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