get_my_time_entries

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of disclosing behavioral traits. It does not explicitly state that the operation is read-only, mention potential side effects, permissions, rate limits, or error conditions. The verb 'Get' implies read-only behavior, but this is not explicitly disclosed.

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 and well-structured. It uses one clear sentence for the main purpose and a compact list for parameter details. No redundant or verbose content is present.

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 simple retrieval tool, the description covers the essential context: what it retrieves, for whom, and the parameter format. It does not mention return format, pagination, or timezone handling, but these are not critical for basic use and no output schema is provided. Overall, the description is sufficiently complete for its simplicity.

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 description adds meaningful information beyond the schema by explaining the parameters: 'time_since' as start time and 'time_until' as end time, with concrete example formats (2025-01-01T00:00:00Z). This compensates for the lack of schema descriptions and helps an agent correctly format the input.

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 tool's purpose: retrieving time entries for the authenticated user within a given time range. The verb 'Get' is specific, and the resource and scope (authenticated user, time range) are explicit, which distinguishes it from sibling tools like add_my_time_entry or list_projects.

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 explains what the tool does but provides no guidance on when to choose it over alternatives such as get_raw_user_reports or get_my_clock. It does not mention filtering, sorting, or other usage conditions that would help an agent decide between similar tools.

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