clickup_time_list

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

With no annotations, the description carries full burden. It mentions coverage of both manual and stopped timers and the return format, but does not disclose pagination, ordering, or default behavior when no filters are provided. The schema's note about a 30-day cap is not repeated in the description.

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 concise with two informative sentences. The first sentence states purpose and filters; the second adds coverage and return format. No unnecessary words.

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 no output schema, the description includes return format details. It covers filtering options and entry types. However, it lacks mention of default behavior (e.g., what happens when all params omitted) and pagination, which would be helpful for a complete picture.

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%, so baseline is 3. The description adds context about optional filtering and coverage, but does not provide additional semantic meaning beyond the schema's detailed parameter descriptions.

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 'list' and the resource 'historical time tracking entries', and specifies optional filtering. It differentiates from siblings like clickup_time_history by mentioning coverage of both manual and stopped timers, but does not explicitly contrast with that sibling.

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 historical entries with optional filters, but does not provide explicit guidance on when to use this tool over alternatives like clickup_time_history or clickup_time_get, nor does it state when not to use it.

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