create_log_export

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

Discloses a key behavioral trait—that creation does not start processing—and the expected follow-up workflow. Also notes the 403 error on non-Enterprise plans. While annotations indicate readOnlyHint=false, the description adds meaningful context about the asynchronous workflow and access restriction.

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?

Three sentences, each with a distinct purpose: action, workflow steps, and access caveat. Information is front-loaded and no redundant wording appears.

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 moderately complex tool with 10 parameters and an output schema, the description covers the critical workflow (create→start→retrieve) and enterprise restriction. Return values are already documented by the output schema, so no additional explanation is needed.

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 input schema provides 100% coverage with detailed descriptions for all 10 parameters, including enums for requested_fields. The description only adds generic 'filters and requested fields', so it does not need to elaborate further. Baseline 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 'Create a log export definition with filters and requested fields' with a specific verb and resource. It further distinguishes the tool from siblings by explicitly noting that it 'only sets up the export and does not start processing', preventing confusion with start_log_export or download_log_export.

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?

Provides explicit workflow guidance: 'call start_log_export next, then use get_log_export or download_log_export'. Also mentions Enterprise-gating and 403 behavior, which helps decide when to use this tool versus alternatives.

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