Sumo Logic Log Search

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

With no annotations, the description carries the burden of behavioral disclosure. It adds value by stating the default time range ('Defaults to the last 15 minutes') and the mutual exclusion of time inputs. However, it does not state that the tool is read-only, what fields the results contain, or any potential side effects. For a search tool, the behavioral disclosure is decent but incomplete.

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 two sentences long, front-loaded with the core action, and every word contributes. It efficiently communicates the main purpose, key constraints, and a default without extraneous information.

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 tool has 7 parameters, no output schema, and no annotations. The description covers only time-related behavior, leaving gaps around expected output format, how the 'query' parameter should be structured, and the effect of flags like includeRecords/includeMessages. While the schema is rich, the lack of output documentation and limited description make the tool moderately, but not fully, contextualized.

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 already has 100% parameter coverage, so the baseline is 3. The description enhances this by explicitly noting that startTime+endTime and lastMinutes are mutually exclusive ('but not both') and by revealing the default time window. These details go beyond the schema's individual descriptions, clarifying relationship and default behavior.

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 the tool's purpose: 'Run a Sumo Logic log query.' This is a specific verb+resource pair that is distinct from sibling tools like sumo_get_search_status, sumo_cancel_search, or sumo_find_errors. However, it does not explicitly name or contrast these alternatives, so it stops short of full sibling differentiation.

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 gives concrete usage guidance for time parameters: 'Provide either startTime+endTime or lastMinutes, but not both' and the default window. This is useful for avoiding misuse, but it does not say when to choose this tool over siblings (e.g., when a general search is needed vs. an error-focused search). Thus the guidance is mainly about parameter handling, not tool selection.

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