logcat

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, so the agent knows this is a safe read operation. The description adds the filtering behavior but does not disclose other traits such as whether the tool blocks, the output format, or whether it captures a snapshot versus streaming. With the annotation covering safety, the description provides minimal additional behavioral context.

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 a single, concise sentence that leads with the primary action ('Read recent logcat output') and mentions optional filters. There is no filler or redundant information, making it easy for an agent to parse quickly.

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 simple read-only tool with four optional parameters and no required fields, the description is nearly complete. It covers the core purpose and filtering options. The only gap is the lack of information about the return format or any potential caveats (e.g., whether it reads only the buffer or streams), but given the tool's simplicity and the presence of the readOnlyHint annotation, this is a minor omission.

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 100%, so all four parameters are already documented with descriptions. The tool description reinforces the purpose of 'filter' and 'package' but does not add new semantic details beyond what the schema provides. Baseline of 3 is appropriate when the schema carries the full parameter documentation.

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 states a specific verb ('Read') and resource ('logcat output'), and clearly distinguishes the tool from its sibling 'clear_logcat' by describing the read operation. It also names the optional filters (regex, package), making the tool's purpose unambiguous.

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 the tool is for reading logcat, but it does not explicitly state when to use it over alternatives like adb_shell (which could also fetch logs) or when not to use it. It does not mention the sibling 'clear_logcat' as the tool to use for clearing, leaving usage guidance to inference.

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