get_logs

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden. It discloses the potential large output, which is useful behavioral context, but it does not explicitly state that it is a read-only operation, mention privileges, or note any other constraints beyond what is implied by 'show'.

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, front-loaded with the action, and a brief caveat. Every sentence serves a purpose with no redundancy.

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?

For a simple getter with one parameter and an output schema, the description covers the core behavior and adds a useful size warning. It lacks explicit device format instructions, but this is a minor gap given the simplicity and available schema/output schema.

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?

The schema has one required 'device' parameter with 0% description coverage. The description mentions 'the device's log buffer' but does not clarify how to specify the device (e.g., hostname, IP, list format) or add any meaning beyond the parameter name itself.

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 it shows the device's log buffer, using the specific underlying command 'show logging'. This is a distinct verb+resource from sibling tools like get_running_config or get_version.

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 for viewing logs and warns that output can be large, but it does not explicitly say when to use this tool versus alternatives like run_show_command or other getters. No exclusion or alternative instructions are given.

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