log_tail

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

With no annotations, the description effectively indicates that the tool performs a read-only operation by stating 'Return'. It does not mention permissions or side effects, but for a simple read operation, this is sufficiently transparent.

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 sentence with no fluff. It communicates the core functionality efficiently and is front-loaded with the verb.

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 low complexity, a single-parameter schema, and the presence of an output schema, the description is largely complete. It could mention default behavior, but that is covered by the schema.

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 description clarifies that the 'lines' parameter determines the number of lines returned, but it does not provide additional constraints or format details. Since schema coverage is 0%, the description adds some value but remains minimal.

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 uses a clear verb ('Return') and explicitly names the resource ('nextcloud.log'). It is unambiguous and distinguishes the tool from siblings since no other sibling tool targets log reading.

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 clear context for when to use the tool (for viewing log tail), but it does not explicitly state when not to use it or mention alternative tools. Given that no sibling tool serves a similar purpose, the guidance is adequate.

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