getTimeEntries

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

With no annotations, the description must disclose behavioral traits (e.g., pagination, sorting, read-only nature). It only says 'List time entries', omitting that it supports pagination via offset/limit and sorting via sort parameter, which are evident only from the schema. No mention of rate limits or side effects.

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 (one sentence), which is efficient but too minimal. It borders on tautology (tool name already implies listing). While not verbose, it sacrifices clarity for brevity.

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?

The tool has a complex schema with many parameters (filters, pagination, nested objects) and many sibling tools, yet the description provides no context on how to use it effectively. No output schema exists, so the description should explain return format, but it does not.

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%, so the description should at least summarize key parameters. It does not add any meaning beyond the schema, leaving the agent to infer all parameter semantics from their names and types alone.

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 states the action (list) and resource (time entries) clearly, but fails to differentiate from sibling tools like getTimeEntry (singular) or getTimeEntryActivities. It does not indicate scope or filtering capabilities.

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?

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives (e.g., getTimeEntry for a single entry). The description lacks any context about prerequisites or scenarios.

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