pod_logs

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the burden of behavioral disclosure. It describes the tool as read-only '[READ]' and mentions default tail_lines, but lacks details on rate limits, maximum lines, or whether logs are real-time. Adequate but not rich.

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 concise, with a clear purpose line and a bulleted list of arguments. Every sentence adds value, and the structure is easy to parse.

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 simple log retrieval tool, the description covers the purpose, parameters, defaults, and key constraints (container required only for multi-container). Minor omission: no mention of output format or limit on tail_lines. Still, very complete.

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%, so the description fully compensates. Each parameter is explained: name (pod name), namespace (default namespace if omitted), tail_lines (number of trailing lines), container (required only for multi-container), target (k8s target). This adds crucial context 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?

The description clearly states the tool returns the most recent log lines for a pod, with a [READ] hint. It distinguishes itself from sibling tools like pod_describe or pod_list by specifically targeting log retrieval.

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 implies usage for viewing logs but does not explicitly mention when to use this tool versus alternatives like pod_describe or when not to use it. No exclusions or context-specific guidance is provided.

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