session_log

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden for behavioral disclosure. It only marks '[READ]' and says 'return the log records', but omits important details such as output format, pagination, potential size/volume of logs, or whether any side effects occur. This is insufficient for a tool with no structured annotations.

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 with '[READ]' and a clear purpose. It avoids filler, with two sentences plus a concise args list. Every sentence contributes to understanding the tool's purpose or usage, making it highly efficient.

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 tool with only two parameters and no output schema, the description covers purpose, use case, and parameter meaning. However, it does not describe the return value's structure or any limitations, which could leave an agent uncertain about how to interpret the result. Given the absence of an output schema, a bit more detail on return format would be beneficial, but the tool is simple enough that this is adequate.

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 schema provides only titles ('Session Id', 'Target') with no descriptions, so the documentation coverage is 0%. The description compensates by explaining both parameters: session_id is a 'Veeam session id (see session_list)' and target is a 'Veeam target name from config'. This adds meaningful context beyond the schema, though it could be more detailed about allowed values or formats.

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 'Return the log records (events) of one session' with a clear verb and resource, explicitly scoped to a single session. This distinguishes it from siblings like session_list (lists sessions) and session_get (presumably returns session details), making the tool's purpose unambiguous.

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?

It gives an explicit use case ('see why a session failed instead of re-running the job blind') and even suggests an alternative (re-running) to avoid. However, it does not explicitly mention when not to use it or reference sibling tools like job_failure_rca that might also diagnose failures, so it falls short of full alternative guidance.

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