redis_slowlog

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

No annotations are present, so the description carries the full burden. It discloses the read nature, count cap (128), target resolution, and the return envelope with a truncation warning. This is important behavioral info—especially the truncated flag—that an agent needs to interpret results correctly.

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 tightly structured: a one-line purpose, a bulleted args section, and a return envelope description. Every sentence adds value—no fluff, no repetition. It's easy to scan and front-loaded with the main action.

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 read tool with two optional params and no output schema, the description provides everything needed: purpose, parameter meanings, return format, and truncation semantics. The size and complexity are modest, so this is complete without needing to document alternatives or edge cases.

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 parameters are only typed with defaults. The description fully compensates: 'count' is explained as max entries with a cap, 'target' is described as a Redis target name from config with a default. This adds meaning beyond the raw 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 opens with a clear, specific action: "[READ] Recent SLOWLOG entries, slowest first." This states the tool's verb (read), resource (SLOWLOG), and ordering, distinguishing it from Redis memory, config, and latency tools among its siblings.

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 context: this is for pulling recent slowlog entries, with optional count and target parameters. It doesn't explicitly name alternatives or say when not to use it, but the tool's purpose is self-evident and it's distinct from sibling read-only tools like redis_server_info or redis_memory_stats.

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