get_cluster_slowlog

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It discloses that the tool returns an error if not in cluster mode and that it aggregates data across all nodes. However, it does not mention whether the operation is read-only (likely safe) or if any authentication is required. Additional context about rate limits or destructive potential would be beneficial.

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 extremely concise: two sentences that immediately convey the main purpose, comparison to alternatives, and an important error condition. Every sentence adds value.

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 no output schema and only two optional parameters, the description is fairly complete. It clarifies the tool's role, scope (all nodes), and error scenario. A minor addition about the format of the returned slowlog entries would make it fully self-contained.

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 100% (both 'limit' and 'instanceId' have descriptions). The tool description adds no additional semantics beyond what the schema already provides, so a baseline score of 3 is appropriate.

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 'Get the aggregated slowlog across ALL nodes in the cluster.' It uses a specific verb ('Get') and resource ('aggregated slowlog'), and distinguishes from sibling 'get_slowlog' by noting that per-node slowlogs are incomplete.

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 this is 'the primary tool for finding slow commands in cluster mode' and contrasts with per-node slowlogs. It also mentions that it returns an error if not in cluster mode. However, it does not mention any other alternatives like 'get_commandlog' or 'get_latency' that might be relevant for different performance investigations.

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