query_plugin_trace_logs

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

Adds substantial behavior beyond the read-only annotations: bounded reads, default exclusion of message/exception text, permanent exclusion of configuration and secureconfiguration, and an important interpretation caveat for empty results. These details materially affect how an agent should use and trust the output.

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 tightly packed sentences, front-loaded with the core operation and filter scope. Each sentence adds useful information: scope, default data exclusions, and result-interpretation caveat.

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?

For a 19-parameter read tool with no output schema, the description covers the key semantics: what is read, how it is bounded, what text is excluded by default, and what empty results do not prove. It could say more about pagination/truncation behavior, but the schema already documents those parameters.

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 description coverage is high at 84%, so most parameter meaning is already carried by the schema. The description reinforces the main filters and text-exclusion default, but it does not add much parameter-level detail beyond what structured fields provide.

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?

States a specific verb ('Read') and resource ('native plugin trace rows') with the supported filter dimensions. It clearly distinguishes this from adjacent plugin diagnostics by emphasizing trace-row retrieval and bounded native reads.

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?

Gives clear context for when the tool applies: reading trace rows by time, correlation ID, step, and exact plugin type. It does not explicitly name sibling alternatives such as diagnose_plugin_failure, but it provides enough operational context to select it for trace-log inspection.

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