enoch_worker_logs

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, destructiveHint=false, idempotentHint=true. Description adds 'bounded' and 'from allowlisted log sources', providing context on limits and access control. However, no details on response format or pagination.

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?

Extremely concise at 6 words, but it sacrifices necessary detail. The purpose is front-loaded, but the brevity leaves gaps in parameter understanding.

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?

With 4 parameters, no output schema, and no parameter descriptions, the description is insufficient for an agent to correctly invoke the tool. Missing parameter semantics and return value expectations.

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 description does not explain any of the 4 parameters (lane, log_kind, run_id, lines). Agent gains no additional meaning beyond the schema's enum values and defaults.

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 'Optional bounded worker log tail from allowlisted log sources' clearly states the tool retrieves a bounded log tail from worker logs, specifying verb (tail), resource (worker logs), and constraints (bounded, allowlisted). It distinguishes from sibling tools like enoch_worker_artifacts and enoch_run_detail by focusing on logs.

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 guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. The description lacks explicit when-to-use, when-not-to-use, or references to sibling tools like enoch_run_detail for run-specific logs.

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