get_container_logs

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

Without annotations, the description has the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It only states it returns logs but fails to indicate whether it is a read-only operation, any rate limits, or what happens if the container does not exist.

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, focused sentence that is front-loaded and contains no unnecessary words, making it highly concise and clear.

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?

While the description covers the basic purpose, it lacks details on the output format or specific limitations beyond those implied by the tail parameter. Given the presence of an output schema, the description is minimally adequate but not comprehensive.

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 100%, so the description adds no additional meaning beyond the schema. The parameters 'name' and 'tail' are adequately described in the input schema, leading to a baseline score of 3.

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 that the tool returns the last lines of logs of a container, effectively distinguishing it from sibling tools like list_containers, inspect_container, and restart_container.

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?

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives. There is no mention of prerequisites, such as the container needing to exist or be running, nor any conditions under which it should be avoided.

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