swsd_log_time

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

The description adds value beyond annotations by stating it is a WRITE operation that honors SWSD_WRITE_MODE and does not retry on transient failure. Annotations only indicate readOnlyHint=false, so these additional behavioral details help the agent understand failure handling and configuration dependence.

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 extremely concise: two sentences with no wasted words. The first sentence clearly states the purpose and resource, and the second summarizes required parameters and key behaviors. It is front-loaded and efficient.

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 that the tool has 4 parameters (all required), a simple schema, and no output schema, the description adequately covers the action. However, it lacks details on success/failure outcomes, authentication requirements, or any side effects. The mention of 'no retry' partially addresses failure behavior, but overall completeness is moderate.

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?

Although schema description coverage is 100%, the tool description merely lists the required parameter names without adding new semantic meaning. It restates that minutes_parsed corresponds to a SWSD field, but this is already in the schema. Thus, it adds minimal value 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 verb 'Log time' and the resource 'SWSD incident, problem, change, or release', specifying the exact object types. It lists required parameters, making the action unambiguous. This differentiates it from sibling tools like swsd_list_time_tracks or swsd_update_time_track.

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 provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. There is no mention of prerequisites, such as needing an existing record, or when not to use it. The mention of SWSD_WRITE_MODE gives minimal context but no explicit comparison to sibling tools.

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