session_log

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

With no annotations, the description bears full burden for behavioral transparency. It only indicates a read operation via [READ] but fails to disclose any other behaviors such as pagination, size limits, permissions, or side effects. This is insufficient for a complete understanding.

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 very concise: two sentences plus an args list. All information is front-loaded and each sentence adds value without redundancy. It efficiently conveys purpose, usage, and parameter details.

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?

Given no output schema, the description does not explain the format or structure of the returned logs, only that they are 'log records (events)'. It also does not address edge cases like empty logs or errors. Overall, it is adequate for a simple tool but missing some depth.

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 0%, but the description provides clear semantics for both parameters: session_id is the Veeam session id (with cross-reference to session_list), and target is the Veeam target name from config. This compensates well for the lack of schema-level descriptions.

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 it returns log records of one session with a [READ] marker, using specific verb 'Return' and resource 'log records of one session'. It distinguishes from siblings like session_list and session_get by focusing on logs for a single session.

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 explicitly states when to use the tool: 'to see why a session failed instead of re-running the job blind'. It also references session_list for obtaining session_id, providing context. However, it does not explicitly mention when not to use it or alternatives.

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