Retrieve and inspect remote gzipped audit logs over SSH, with optional line limits for targeted analysis; set max_lines=0 to fetch the entire log.
Legge un log audit .gz remoto (max_lines=0 = tutto).
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| alias | Yes | ||
| filename | Yes | ||
| max_lines | No |
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| result | Yes |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v0.1.0Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
No annotations are provided, so the description must carry behavioral disclosure. It says the log is remote and .gz and explains max_lines=0, but omits authentication needs, error behavior, decompression handling, and other operational context for a remote file read.
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?
A single, front-loaded sentence with no filler. It states the action, the remote/.gz aspect, and the max_lines=0 convention without unnecessary words.
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?
The output schema means return values need not be explained, but with no annotations and 0% schema coverage the description is too thin for a 3-parameter remote file reader. Required parameters and remote access behavior remain undocumented.
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%, and the description only partially explains max_lines=0. It does not explain the required alias or filename parameters, such as what an alias refers to or whether filename must be a .gz path.
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?
States a specific verb and resource: reads a remote .gz audit log. The word 'remote' helps distinguish it from read_audit_log and list_remote_audit_logs, but no sibling is named explicitly, so it falls short of a full 5.
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 read_audit_log, list_remote_audit_logs, or list_audit_logs. The only usage hint is the max_lines=0 convention, which is parameter behavior rather than selection guidance.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.