get_job_log

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must fully disclose behavior. It indicates a read operation (retrieve) but does not mention potential limitations (e.g., maximum lines retrievable, performance impact, availability of logs after job completion) or error scenarios.

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, front-loaded sentence with no unnecessary words. Every word contributes to conveying the core functionality.

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 the tool has an output schema (not detailed but present) and only three simple parameters, the description is adequate but leaves gaps: it does not specify the format or size of the returned log, nor behavior for invalid job IDs or non-existent logs.

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%, yet the description only implicitly references the 'tail_lines' parameter via 'last N lines'. Required parameters 'job_id' and 'output_dir' are not explained, and their meanings or constraints are missing.

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 action 'retrieve' and the resource 'job's log output', with a specific qualifier 'last N lines'. It effectively distinguishes from sibling tools like get_job_status (status) and list_jobs (listing) by focusing on log content.

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 when wanting to see recent log output, but provides no explicit guidance on when to use this tool vs. alternatives like get_job_status or cancel_job. No prerequisites or exclusions are mentioned.

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