Work time entries

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint and non-destructive behavior. The description adds valuable behavioral details: 50-entry pagination, a 366-day maximum range, and the critical caveat that minute-exact durations are authoritative over preformatted strings to avoid rounding errors.

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 compact and front-loaded: the first sentence establishes scope, date range, and pagination; the second sentence explains the authoritative duration fields and rounding risk. Every sentence adds necessary information without filler.

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 read-only paginated list, the description covers the key invocation details: date range defaults, pagination, and response semantics for durations. It does not describe the full return envelope or ordering, but the annotations and schema cover safety and parameters well, making it sufficient for correct invocation.

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 covers all four parameters, so the baseline is 3. The description adds operational meaning beyond the schema by stating the default last-30-days range, the maximum range, and the page size, which helps agents set date_from, date_to, and page correctly.

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 a specific resource and scope: a user's work time entries filtered by date range, with pagination. It distinguishes itself from sibling tools by focusing on time entries and user/date filtering, so an agent can select it correctly without opening the schema.

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 provides clear usage context: retrieve work time entries for a user within a date range, with default and maximum range values. It does not explicitly contrast with alternatives like list_project_times, but the scope is unambiguous and no misleading exclusions are present.

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