pilot_console

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

No annotations provided, so description carries full burden. It explains the circular buffer, clear parameter effect, return format (timestamped list or empty message). It does not mention any destructive implications beyond clearing, which is described.

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 a clear overview, usage context, parameter explanations, return value, and error note. Each sentence adds value without redundancy.

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?

Covers purpose, parameters, return format, and error behavior. No output schema exists, so description adequately explains return values. Parameters are fully documented.

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%, baseline 3. Description adds meaning: explains level filter (e.g., error includes warnings) and clear usage (useful for checking new messages). This goes beyond the schema's enum description.

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 specifies that the tool retrieves browser console messages from a circular buffer, listing types like console.log, console.warn, console.error. It clearly distinguishes from siblings, as no other tool deals with console messages.

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 provides explicit usage scenarios: 'Use when the user wants to debug JavaScript errors, check application logs, inspect warnings, or see what the page is printing to the console.' It does not include when-not-to-use, but the context is clear enough.

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