get_daily_log

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

No annotations provided, but description gives full behavioral context: it reads a file at a specific path, explains how entries are created, and describes the content. Could mention that it's a read-only operation with no side effects, but it's clear enough.

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 well-structured with bilingual text and separated sections, but it is somewhat verbose, containing implementation details that might be unnecessary for an agent. However, every sentence adds value.

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 simple parameters and presence of output schema, the description provides all necessary context: file format, entry structure, and comparison with alternatives. No gaps identified.

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 has 0% description coverage, but the description fully explains both parameters: project_folder as 'Project folder path' and date as 'ISO date YYYY-MM-DD (optional, defaults to today)', adding significant meaning beyond the schema structure.

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?

Clearly states 'Read a project's daily log' with specific verb and resource. Distinguishes from sibling tool search_knowledge by noting it's faster for quick recall.

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 describes when to use ('new session needs a glance-able timeline'), and contrasts with search_knowledge. Also explains the tool's origin in v3.30 and relationship to wrap_up_session.

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