Estimate work

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

Annotations declare readOnlyHint=true, and the description adds substantial behavioral context: derivation logic (cap label, median, default) and output fields (basis, confidence, spend so far, suggested model). No contradiction with annotations.

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 sentence that front-loads the main purpose. It is slightly verbose with technical details but remains clear and well-structured.

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 algorithm is well explained and output fields are listed, but there are gaps: the relationship between 'project' param and 'all open tickets' is ambiguous; no output structure; no error conditions or prerequisites described.

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 coverage is 0%, and the description provides no explanation for the 'project' parameter (e.g., format, meaning). The description must compensate but fails to add any semantic value beyond the schema.

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?

Description clearly states it provides per-ticket token estimates for all open tickets using historical data. The verb 'estimate' and resource 'work' are specific, and it distinguishes from sibling tools like plan_work or log_work.

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 the algorithm but does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives. It implies usage for obtaining token estimates, but lacks guidance on when not to use or what alternatives exist.

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