Get Eden Logs

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, so the description adds extra behavior: it reads only the tail, supports case-insensitive substring filtering, and works after Eden exits. This goes beyond the minimal safety disclosure and provides useful context without contradicting annotations.

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 no filler. The core function is front-loaded, and optional behavior is stated efficiently. Every sentence earns its place.

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?

An output schema exists, so return values are covered. However, with six parameters and zero schema descriptions, the description should clarify more of them. It covers the main use case but leaves pagination, session filtering, and level filtering unexplained.

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 0%, so the description must compensate. It alludes to 'tail' and 'contains' but does not explain cursor, max_bytes, session_id, tail_lines, or minimum_level. With six optional parameters, this is insufficient for an agent to understand their purpose and valid values.

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 reads the tail of Eden's eden_log.txt, with an optional case-insensitive substring filter. This specific verb+resource combination distinguishes it from sibling tools like get_runtime_metrics or get_session_storage.

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 implies usage for reading logs and notes it works after Eden exits, but it does not explicitly compare to alternatives or state when not to use it. Sibling tools like export_diagnostics might be relevant, but no guidance is provided.

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