podman_container_logs

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and destructiveHint=false, so the safety profile is known. The description adds useful behavioral details beyond annotations: the default 200-line tail limit and the 'E| ' prefix for stderr lines. This helps the agent anticipate output formatting without overselling.

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 two short sentences, with the action stated first and key defaults included. Every word earns its place, and there is no redundant content.

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 output schema exists, return values need not be described. However, with 8 parameters and no parameter guidance or usage scenarios, the description is minimally complete for a log-fetching tool. It provides the essential behavioral facts but misses opportunities to mention filtering options or when to use them.

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%, and the description does not compensate. It fails to explain any of the 8 parameters (grep, since, until, stdout, stderr, timestamps, etc.) beyond what the schema already provides. The only mention of 'tail' default is a value already present in the schema, adding no semantic 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 clearly states the action ('取' / fetch) and the resource ('container logs'), which unambiguously distinguishes it from sibling tools like podman_container_inspect or podman_container_top. The name and description together leave no doubt about the tool's function.

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 implies the tool is used to retrieve container logs, but it provides no explicit guidance on when to use this over other tools (e.g., when to use grep, since, until filters). No exclusions or alternative recommendations are given, so the usage context is only implied.

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