read_audit_log

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full behavioral burden. 'Read' implies a safe read-only operation and 'this run's' implies scoping, but it says nothing about authorization, what decisions are recorded, ordering, or size; it relies on the output schema to convey content.

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?

A single, front-loaded sentence with no filler. For a zero-parameter tool with an output schema, this is an appropriately sized description.

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 output schema covers return values, and there are no parameters to explain, so the core is adequate. However, the key term 'this run' is undefined and there is no link to sibling tools that read related artifacts, leaving the agent without context for when this log is relevant.

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 tool takes zero parameters, so the baseline is 4 and there is no parameter semantics to document. Nothing in the description is needed or missing on this dimension.

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 gives a specific verb (read) and resource (decision audit log) and scopes it to 'this run'. It distinguishes the artifact from siblings like read_digest and read_ledger reasonably well, though 'decision audit log' vs 'ledger' overlap enough that an agent may still hesitate.

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?

There is no indication of when to read this log versus read_ledger or read_digest, nor any stated trigger or exclusion. The agent is left to infer the use case entirely.

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