clockodo_clock_status

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

The readOnlyHint annotation already covers the read-only safety profile. The description adds useful context that the running entry is 'started but not yet saved' and has type 'clock', but it does not describe response shape, empty-state behavior, or other constraints. Acceptable, but not rich.

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?

Two concise sentences with no filler. The core fact — running, unsaved, type 'clock' — is front-loaded and every sentence earns its place.

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 zero-parameter, read-only status tool, the description adequately identifies what is returned and that it may be absent ('if any'). Explicit return-shape or null-handling details would strengthen it, but the tool can be called correctly based on the information provided.

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?

The tool has zero parameters and an empty input schema, so there is no parameter meaning for the description to add. The baseline for 0 parameters 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?

The description uses a specific verb ('Returns') and resource ('currently running clocked time') and clarifies it is the unsaved running entry with type 'clock'. It is clear, though it does not explicitly name or contrast sibling 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 when to use this tool — to check the currently running clock — but provides no explicit guidance about alternatives such as clockodo_clock_start, clockodo_clock_delete, or list_entries. Sibling differentiation is left mostly to inference.

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