automations_get_last_automation_trace

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

With no annotations, the description carries full burden. It discloses that it fetches the most recent trace and explains the failed_only parameter's behavior. However, it does not mention any behavioral traits like rate limits, side effects, or return format (though output schema exists), making it adequate but not rich.

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 with clear front-loading. Every sentence adds value: first states purpose, second explains a parameter. No fluff.

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 and sibling tools, the description covers the core use case adequately. However, missing description for automation_id and lack of explicit mention of what a 'trace' includes (though output schema may cover that) leaves minor gaps.

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 coverage is 0%, so description must compensate. It explains the failed_only parameter well but does not describe automation_id, leaving the required parameter undocumented. This partial coverage reduces the score.

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 fetches the most recent trace for an automation, using the verb 'fetch' and specifying the resource 'trace'. It distinguishes itself from siblings like automations_get_automation_trace and automations_list_automation_traces by calling itself a 'Shortcut' and focusing on the most recent trace.

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 provides explicit context for when to use this tool: for debugging by fetching the latest failed trace. It implies the alternative of using list_automation_traces for other cases but does not explicitly state when not to use it or list all alternatives.

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