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

Annotations only carry readOnlyHint=true, and the description usefully adds the default window (last hour), the hard cap (30 days), and the newest-match-first ordering — none of which are in the schema or annotations. It stops short of describing pagination behavior or result volume limits.

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?

Compact and front-loaded: what it searches, ordering, return fields, then window defaults and filters. The trailing internal RPC path ('Depot: GithubActionsService/SearchGithubActionsLogs') is dead weight for an agent, the only real waste.

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?

With 10 optional parameters, no required fields, and no output schema, the description usefully names the return fields and the default time window an agent needs to form a valid call. It could say more about paging and result caps, but nothing essential is missing.

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 description coverage is 100%, so every one of the 10 parameters is already documented with examples and formats. The description only restates the filter dimensions in aggregate ('repository, workflow, runner label, action or compute id'), adding no format or interaction detail 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?

States a specific verb+resource ('Search GitHub Actions log lines from Depot runners') and adds sort order and returned field list (job, workflow, step, timestamp, body, lineId). It implicitly separates itself from depot_ci_get_job_logs by being a cross-run text search rather than a single job's log dump, but it never names a sibling or explicitly contrasts scope.

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?

Gives real operating context — defaults to the last hour and a 30-day maximum window — which tells the agent how to scope a call. However, it never says when to reach for this instead of depot_ci_get_job_logs or depot_get_build_step_logs, so the routing decision is left to inference.

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