Plecs Extract Execution Log Data

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

readOnlyHint=true already declares the safety profile, and the description correctly reinforces a non-mutating, read-last-result behavior. It adds the scoping detail 'last run', which is useful, but omits the practical edge case (no prior run / cleared log) that would most affect an agent's decision to call it.

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?

A single front-loaded sentence that names the resource first and qualifies it with the counter types. Zero filler and nothing that could be cut.

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?

With an output schema present, return values need not be explained, and the readOnly annotation covers safety, so the remaining job is minimal and largely done. The only gap is the precondition (a completed run must exist), which would help an agent avoid a failed call.

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 tool takes zero parameters, so the baseline is 4 and there is nothing for the description to disambiguate. The description correctly does not invent parameter discussion.

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?

States a specific resource ('runtime execution-log counters') and even enumerates the counter families (Jacobian/Newton/solver call counts), which lets an agent tell it apart from diagnostic/statistics siblings. It stops short of naming an alternative, but the resource is distinctive enough that confusion is unlikely.

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 phrase 'for the last run' implies this is a post-simulation inspection call, so timing is inferable, but there is no explicit when-to-use or when-not-to-use statement and no mention of what happens if no run exists. Adequate but leaves routing to inference.

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