lattice_get_deployment_logs

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

No annotations provided, so the description carries full burden. It discloses the types of events and mentions 'timing', but does not indicate whether the operation is read-only, requires specific permissions, or has any side effects. For a simple log retrieval tool, this is adequate but not exhaustive.

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 that front-loads the resource and purpose, then lists key events. No unnecessary words; every word contributes value.

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 a single required parameter and no output schema, the description sufficiently explains what the logs contain and covers the event types. It could benefit from mentioning the output format (e.g., array of objects with timestamp and event), but it is nearly complete for a simple retrieval tool.

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?

Only one parameter (id) with schema coverage 100%. The description does not add meaning beyond the schema's 'Deployment ID' label. Baseline 3 is appropriate as the parameter is simple and well-documented in the schema.

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 specifies a clear verb ('Get') and resource ('deployment logs'), and enumerates the types of events included (pull, create, start, swap, rollback). This differentiates it from sibling tools like lattice_get_deployment (which returns deployment details) and lattice_get_audit_log (which might cover broader events).

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 explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives (e.g., lattice_get_audit_log or lattice_get_deployment). The description implies usage for deployment lifecycle events, but does not state prerequisites or when not to use it.

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