delete_time_entry

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

Annotations already declare destructiveHint=true and idempotentHint=true, so the 'cannot be undone' line mostly restates that. It adds no information about permissions, side effects on logged hours/reporting totals, or what the preview returns, which is where a destructive tool would benefit from extra context.

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?

A single front-loaded sentence with zero filler and the irreversibility warning up front. It is arguably too terse for a destructive operation, but nothing in it is wasted.

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 two-parameter destructive tool with complete annotations and full schema coverage, the essentials are covered by structured data. However, the description omits the critical operational point that confirm=false is the default and that a preview must be shown to the user before the destructive call, which is the main risk of misuse.

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%: time_entry_id's provenance (from list_time_entries) and the confirm preview/apply semantics are both fully documented in the schema. The description adds nothing beyond that, so the baseline 3 applies.

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?

States a specific verb and resource (delete a time entry) so an agent can distinguish it from update_time_entry, get_time_entry, and list_time_entries. It doesn't explicitly name which sibling to prefer for non-destructive edits, but the action is unambiguous.

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?

There is no guidance on when to use this versus update_time_entry, and no mention of the two-step preview/confirm workflow that actually governs invocation. The schema documents the confirm parameter, but the description itself leaves usage entirely implicit.

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