redmine_list_time_entries

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

With no annotations, the description carries full responsibility for behavioral disclosure, yet it only states that the tool lists time entries with optional filters. It does not mention pagination, default limits, sorting, authentication requirements, or any other operational behavior. The schema reveals limit/offset parameters, but the description itself adds no behavioral detail.

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 concise sentence that states the core action and scope with no redundant wording. It is front-loaded and every word contributes to the meaning, making it highly efficient for an agent to parse.

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 has 9 optional parameters, no annotations, and no output schema, the description is under-specified. It lacks information about return structure, pagination behavior, filter combinations, or default values, leaving significant gaps for an agent deciding how to invoke the 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?

Schema description coverage is 100%, so the description is not required to document each parameter. The phrase 'optional filters' loosely encompasses the parameters but adds no meaning beyond what the schema already provides. This meets the baseline for full schema coverage.

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 ('List') and resource ('time entries') with an explicit scope ('optional filters'), clearly distinguishing it from get_time_entry (single entry) and other list tools. It is unambiguous and immediately identifies the tool's function.

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 offers no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as redmine_get_time_entry, redmine_create_time_entry, or redmine_list_time_entry_activities. There are no exclusions, prerequisites, or usage contexts provided beyond the basic listing action.

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