query_signins

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, destructiveHint=false. The description adds value by disclosing non-standard behaviors: requires service binding, returns { unprovisioned: true } when absent, and marks sample data with 'representative: true'. No contradictions with 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 three sentences, front-loaded with the main purpose. Each sentence adds unique information without redundancy. No wasted words.

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 complexity (4 parameters, no output schema), the description covers the main use case and edge cases (unprovisioned, representative flag). It could mention pagination or result limits, but overall it is fairly complete for a read-only query tool.

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 100%, so the description adds minimal extra meaning. It reinforces the three optional filters (user_principal_name, failures_only, since_hours) but provides no new details beyond the schema. Baseline of 3 is appropriate.

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 verb ('Query') and resource ('Microsoft Entra sign-in logs'), and specifies optional filters. It distinguishes from siblings like 'query_ual' by focusing on sign-in logs specifically.

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 mentions optional filters and the requirement of m365Proxy binding, but does not explicitly guide when to use this tool vs alternatives like 'query_ual'. It provides context on edge cases (unprovisioned, representative) but lacks explicit when-not or sibling comparisons.

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