civil3d_audit

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full responsibility. It correctly implies a read operation and lists output fields, but does not disclose additional behavioral traits such as rate limits, authentication requirements, or whether the log is per-session, limiting transparency.

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 efficient sentences. The first sentence states the core purpose; the second adds output details and usage context. No unnecessary 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 tool's simplicity (one optional parameter, no output schema, no nested objects), the description covers input, output fields, and a usage hint. It does not specify the output format (e.g., list or object) but enumerates the fields, making it sufficiently complete.

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?

The only parameter 'limit' is fully described in the schema with default and max values (100% schema coverage). The tool description adds no extra semantics beyond that, so the baseline score of 3 applies.

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 'Read the audit log' with a specific verb and resource. It enumerates the fields shown (timestamp, method, description, success/failure, duration), differentiating it from sibling tools like civil3d_health (likely current state) and civil3d_execute (actions).

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 labels the tool as 'useful for debugging and traceability,' providing context for when to use it. However, it does not explicitly state when not to use it or mention alternatives among the sibling tools.

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