get_log_export_field_restrictions

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, openWorldHint, idempotentHint, and destructiveHint=false, but the description adds significant behavioral context beyond those: required API key scopes (logs.export, completion scope for some fields), enterprise gating, and the 403 error on non-Enterprise plans. No contradiction with annotations.

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 earning its place: primary purpose, usage directive, and necessary caveats. Front-loaded with the core function, no redundancy or filler.

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 output schema is present and annotations cover operational hints, the description fully rounds out context: it explains when to call (before exports), what scopes are needed, and enterprise gating. This is complete for a read-only, single-parameter tool.

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 single parameter workspace_id is fully described in the schema ('Workspace ID whose export field restrictions should be read'), with 100% schema description coverage. The description does not add syntax or additional meaning to the parameter beyond what the schema already provides, so the baseline 3 applies.

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 opens with a specific verb ('Get') and a precise resource ('organisation-managed fields that a workspace is restricted from including in log exports'). It clearly distinguishes the tool from sibling tools by referencing create_log_export and update_log_export, making its unique function obvious.

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?

Explicitly instructs when to use: 'Use before create_log_export or update_log_export to avoid requesting disallowed fields.' It also provides contextual caveats (API key scope, enterprise gating, 403 on non-Enterprise), giving clear guidance on prerequisites and expected failures.

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