get_logs_around

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

No annotations provided, so description carries full burden. Discloses basic retrieval behavior (centered, up to size records) but omits details like authorization, rate limits, error handling, or exact splitting of before/after records. Adequate but not rich.

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?

Two sentences with zero waste. First sentence covers action and result; second sentence provides use case and context. Front-loaded with essential info.

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 no output schema, the description adequately explains what the tool does and when to use it. Could hint at return format or potential errors, but for a read operation with clear parameters, it is reasonably complete. Sibling tools are mentioned indirectly via use case.

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 by explaining how parameters interact: 'centered on the anchor timestamp' and 'up to size records' clarify the selection logic beyond individual schema descriptions. Does not detail split ratio, but adds 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?

Describes fetching log records around a timestamp, with specific verb ('Fetch'), resource ('log records in a stream'), and scope ('immediately before and after', 'centered'). Clearly distinguishes from sibling tools like search_logs and batch_query.

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?

Explicitly states it is useful for viewing context around a known event without writing SQL, providing guidance on when to use. Does not explicitly list when not to use or alternatives beyond the SQL query hint, but context is clear.

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