get_recent_logs

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

With no annotations, description fully discloses behavior: returns recent N lines in time order, deduplicates nearby duplicates with summary showing repetition count and time range, warns that precise order is lost, and suggests adjusting SERIAL_DEDUP for precision.

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?

Description is structured with clear sections in brackets ([언제 호출], [port 규약], [무엇을 반환], [팁], [루프 단계]). Each section is concise and adds essential information without redundancy.

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 2 parameters with no schema descriptions and no output schema, the description fully covers usage context, port protocol, return format, deduplication behavior, alternatives, and troubleshooting. It is more than sufficient for agent to invoke correctly.

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?

Though schema coverage is 0%, description explains port behavior in detail (alias, multiple boards case) and implies lines parameter by mentioning recent N lines. However, it does not explicitly describe the 'lines' parameter or its default value. Well-articulated port semantics compensate for missing schema descriptions.

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?

Description starts with '[언제 호출] 블랙박스 루프의 '결과 확인' 단계' clearly stating when to use it. It specifies it retrieves recent logs and distinguishes from siblings by mentioning alternatives like query_serial_logs and get_serial_status.

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 states when to call after operating equipment, how to handle multiple boards with port specification, and provides troubleshooting tips: if too many results use query_serial_logs, if empty check get_serial_status then ask human.

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