list_worklogs

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

The description explains default behavior (current user, current month, summary aggregate), the effect of the detail parameter, and the purpose of worklogId. With no annotations, it carries the full burden and does so well, though it could mention authentication or project access constraints.

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 three concise sentences, front-loading the main purpose, then details, then use cases. No redundant information.

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 read-only list tool with no output schema, the description covers the essential: purpose, defaults, mode behavior, and a hint for deletion. It could mention output format or empty results, but overall it is sufficiently complete.

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 descriptions already cover each parameter in detail (format, defaults). The description adds value by explaining the overall default behavior and the intended use of detail mode, though the schema coverage is already high.

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 it queries worklogs for a user in a time period, with defaults and two modes (summary vs detail). It provides specific use cases that illustrate the tool's purpose.

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 gives concrete use cases (e.g., 'how many hours did I log this month') and hints that detail mode provides worklogId for delete_worklog, but does not explicitly exclude its use for other tasks like viewing issues.

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