autotask_create_time_entry

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must carry the burden. It describes the ability to tie to tickets/tasks/projects and the concept of Regular Time, but does not disclose side effects like whether this triggers notifications, dependencies on existing records, or any constraints like maximum hours or overlapping entries.

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 concise at two sentences, front-loading the core purpose and then adding the key nuance. No redundant or unnecessary phrases.

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 complexity (12 parameters, no output schema, no annotations), the description provides adequate high-level context about the two use cases (tied vs Regular Time). It could be improved by noting that the response likely returns the created time entry ID, but the lack of output schema reduces the penalty.

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 schema already documents all parameters. The description adds high-level context about the distinction between ticket/task/project and Regular Time, but does not add new detail for individual parameters beyond the 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 clearly states the action (Create a time entry) and the resource (time entry in Autotask). It distinguishes between entries tied to tickets/tasks/projects vs Regular Time, which sets it apart from sibling creation tools like autotask_create_ticket or autotask_create_task.

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 explains when to use this tool (to log time) and provides guidance on using it for regular time with category examples. However, it does not explicitly state when not to use it or mention alternatives among siblings.

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