get_decision_log

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

With no annotations, the description carries full burden. It says 'Read' implying a non-destructive operation, but doesn't disclose response format, pagination behavior, or whether the log is ordered. The 'limit' parameter suggests pagination but that's not explained. Minimal transparency beyond the obvious read-only nature.

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, short sentence with no fluff. It is front-loaded with the core action. However, it is too sparse, missing critical details, but for what it includes, it is concise and efficient.

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?

The tool has two parameters, no output schema, and no annotations, making it moderately simple but not trivial. The description omits return format, ordering, limit bounds, and usage context. An agent knows it reads decisions but not what to expect from the response or how to use the parameters correctly.

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 description coverage is 0%, so the description must compensate. It mentions 'for a session,' which hints that session_id identifies the session, but it does not explain the meaning of 'limit' or the format of session_id. No added value beyond what the parameter names suggest.

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 clear verb ('Read') and resource ('pedagogical decision history for a session'). Clearly distinguishes from siblings like get_assessment_history and get_session_info by specifying 'decision history,' though it doesn't name an alternative explicitly. It is specific enough for an agent to understand the scope.

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?

Gives no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. For example, it doesn't clarify whether this should be used after commit_pedagogical_decision or how it relates to get_session_info. The tool name implies a read operation, but context for when to invoke it is absent.

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