Show the running timer

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

The annotations already declare this as read-only and open-world, and the description adds a useful behavioral detail: it returns a plain message when no timer is running. This provides transparency about the empty-result case without contradicting 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 two concise sentences with no redundant wording. The core purpose is front-loaded, and the empty-state behavior is stated efficiently.

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 the tool's simplicity, zero parameters, read-only annotations, and clear description covering both running and not-running states, nothing meaningful is missing for an agent to select and invoke this tool correctly.

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 tool has zero parameters, so parameter semantics are not a concern. The baseline of 4 applies because there is nothing for the description to add beyond the empty schema.

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 ('Show'), a clear resource ('currently running Clockify timer'), and adds useful detail ('with elapsed time so far'). This clearly distinguishes it from sibling tools like start_timer, stop_timer, and list_time_entries.

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 intended use is implied by the name and description: call this when you need the active timer's status. However, there is no explicit guidance about when to prefer this over alternatives, nor any exclusions mentioned.

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