view_logs

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It mentions 'recent logs' but does not disclose behavioral traits such as whether the tool is read-only, how logs are retrieved, or any limitations (e.g., maximum lines). The default parameters (service='qdrant', lines=50) are not mentioned, leaving behavior partially unspecified.

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 concise sentence with no unnecessary words. Key information (action, resource, valid services) is front-loaded and efficiently conveyed.

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?

For a simple read tool with two parameters and an output schema, the description is adequate in stating the core purpose. However, it omits explanation of the 'lines' parameter and does not outline the output format, which could be provided by the output schema but is not visible here. Overall, it is minimally complete.

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?

The schema has 0% description coverage for parameters. The description adds some context by listing the allowed services ('qdrant, server, or monitor'), but it does not explain the 'lines' parameter or its default value. Thus, it provides minimal added meaning beyond 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 clearly states the tool's purpose: 'View recent logs from a Hephaestus service (qdrant, server, or monitor).' It specifies the action (view), the resource (logs), and the scope (specific services). This effectively distinguishes it from sibling tools which are for checking prerequisites, health checks, or starting/stopping services.

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 usage for viewing logs but does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives. It lacks guidance on when not to use it or which sibling tool might be more appropriate for other tasks (e.g., health_check for status).

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