redmine_list_time_entries

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

No annotations provided, so description must cover behavioral traits. It only states the tool lists entries and returns fields, but omits pagination, ordering, read-only nature, or any constraints. Minimal transparency.

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, but it sacrifices completeness. Every word is earned, yet additional detail is needed for effective use.

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 7 parameters, no output schema, and no annotations, the description is incomplete. It does not cover pagination, filtering behavior, or how to use parameters, leaving significant gaps for an agent.

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%, requiring the description to compensate. It mentions 'optional filters' but does not explain any of the 7 parameters. Returns data examples do not clarify parameter usage. Fails to add meaning 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 tool lists Redmine time entries and specifies the return fields (hours logged, activity, issue, project). It distinguishes from other time entry tools like redmine_get_time_entry (single) and redmine_log_time (create), but does not explicitly differentiate from other list tools.

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 implies usage for listing time entries with optional filters, but provides no guidance on when not to use or alternatives among siblings. Context is implied but no exclusions.

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