list_logs

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of disclosing behavior. It only states the listing action and endpoint, but does not explain pagination, sorting, filtering, or return format. The parameters after, before, and limit suggest pagination, but their semantics are not described. The description is too sparse to inform the agent about observable behavior.

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 a single short sentence, which is efficient in length, but it is under-specified rather than concise. It lacks essential information about parameters and usage. The front-loading of the verb and resource is good, but the brevity results in a hollow definition that fails to provide necessary context.

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?

This is a list operation with three optional parameters, no output schema, and no annotations. The description provides only the action and endpoint, omitting any details about parameter usage, pagination, expected response structure, or edge cases. An agent would be unable to invoke this tool correctly without additional information. The description is grossly incomplete for the tool's complexity.

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%, meaning the schema itself provides no parameter details. The description does not mention or explain the parameters 'after', 'before', or 'limit' at all. An agent cannot infer what these string and number fields represent (e.g., timestamps, cursors, or page size). The description adds zero semantic value beyond the schema's bare type definitions.

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 verb 'List' and the resource 'API request logs', and includes the explicit endpoint '(GET /logs)'. This distinguishes it from the sibling get_log, which retrieves a single log. The purpose is unambiguous and specific.

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?

There is no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. The sibling get_log exists and would logically be for fetching a single log, but the description does not mention this distinction or any conditions for selecting one over the other. No exclusions or alternatives are noted.

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