Get Import Logs

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

The description adds value beyond annotations by disclosing pagination behavior (returns paginated JSON array, page/per_page parameters, pagination metadata) and listing required parameters. Annotations already indicate readOnlyHint, so no contradiction.

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 reasonably concise but contains some redundancy (mentions import logs and scheduling records). The structure is front-loaded with the main purpose, then pagination info, then required params and endpoint. Could be more streamlined.

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?

No output schema exists, so the description should explain return format. It states 'paginated JSON array of Scheduling records' but does not detail record fields. The purpose confusion (logs vs records) limits completeness. Adequate but not thorough.

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%, so baseline is 3. The description mentions required parameters and pagination controls, but the schema already provides descriptions. Some extra context (endpoint path showing parameter roles) adds minimal value.

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 it retrieves import logs for the latest completed or failed import, but then also says it fetches details of a specific Scheduling record by identifier. This creates ambiguity about whether the tool returns import logs or scheduling records. The purpose is somewhat vague.

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?

No guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. The sibling list includes many related tools like get_schedule_by_id and list_schedule_imports, but the description does not differentiate or provide conditions for use.

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