skypilot_api_server_logs

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

The readOnlyHint annotation already declares this is a safe read operation. The description adds that it returns a snapshot of the log output, which usefully clarifies it is not a streaming or follow interface, but it leaves out whether it requires prior authentication or how large the snapshot might be. With annotations covering safety, this modest addition merits a 3.

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?

Three short sentences, each front-loaded with the core action, return behavior, and the one parameter hint. There is no filler or repetition, and the most important information comes first.

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?

An output schema exists, so the description need not explain return values, and it correctly avoids that. For a single optional parameter tool with readOnlyHint, the description covers the essential call semantics, though it could be more complete about prerequisites or how the snapshot relates to streaming alternatives.

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 0%, so the input schema does not document the tail parameter beyond its type and default. The description compensates by explaining that tail limits the number of lines returned, which adds needed meaning. However, it does not clarify units or what happens when tail is omitted, so it only partially fills the gap.

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 states a specific verb and resource: 'Get SkyPilot API server logs'. It is clearly distinguishable from siblings like skypilot_serve_logs or skypilot_job_logs because it names the API server specifically. It is slightly more than a bare restatement but stops short of differentiating it from the other log-related tools.

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?

There is no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as skypilot_serve_logs or skypilot_download_logs. The only usage hint is about the tail parameter, which is parameter semantics, not tool selection. An agent must infer the appropriate context without help.

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