everhour_update_task_time

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must carry the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It only says 'Update time' without explaining whether this overwrites existing records, whether it requires an existing time entry, if it is idempotent, or what side effects it has (e.g., affecting totals). The lack of this information is a significant gap for a mutation tool.

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 a single concise sentence that front-loads the action and resource. Every word earns its place, and there is no redundant or boilerplate content.

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 four parameters, no output schema, and no annotations, the description is too sparse to be contextually complete. It fails to explain how this tool fits with related time-management tools, what the response looks like, or what the behavioral nuances are. The description provides the minimum but leaves major gaps.

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 input schema includes descriptions for all four parameters, and the context indicates 100% coverage. The tool description adds no extra parameter semantics beyond referencing the endpoint. With high schema coverage, a baseline of 3 is appropriate.

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 action ('Update time for a specific task') and explicitly mentions the endpoint ('/tasks/{id}/time'), which adds specificity. However, it does not explicitly distinguish this tool from the sibling 'everhour_add_time_to_task', which could be a closely related action. The verb 'update' vs 'add' provides some differentiation, but not explicit enough for a top score.

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 offers no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It does not say whether this is for modifying existing time entries, how it relates to adding or deleting time, or under what conditions it should be preferred. There is no mention of context, prerequisites, or exclusions.

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