clickup_get_time_entry

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

Annotations already provide readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, and destructiveHint. The description adds behavioral context: negative duration means timer is still running, and error handling for 404. This supplements the annotations well without redundancy.

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 well-structured with clear sections: purpose, endpoint, when to use/not use, returns, examples, error handling. Each sentence adds value, and the length is appropriate for the complexity.

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?

Covers all essential aspects: purpose, usage guidance, behavioral details (negative duration), return format, error handling, and example. With annotations and an output schema presumably present, the description is complete for decision-making.

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 already provides descriptions for each parameter. The description adds little parameter-level detail beyond mentioning team_id and time_entry_id in the endpoint and noting response_format in the example. Given schema coverage is high (schema has descriptions), the description's added value is marginal.

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 'Fetch one time entry by id', specifies the verb (fetch) and resource (time entry by id). It distinguishes from siblings like clickup_get_time_entries, clickup_get_time_entry_history, and clickup_get_running_time_entry by explicitly naming them in the 'When NOT to Use' section.

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?

Has dedicated 'When to Use' and 'When NOT to Use' sections. States use when you already have a time_entry_id, and provides clear alternatives for list, history, and running timer scenarios. Also lists prerequisites (id from list or create).

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