get_log_files

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

With no annotations, the description carries the transparency burden. It reveals pagination and filtering but omits important details such as ordering, error handling for invalid directories, or the structure of the returned list. The description is adequate but not thorough.

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 single sentence is concise and front-loaded with key information. Every part contributes to the purpose, though it could be split for clarity. No wasted words.

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?

The description is insufficient for a tool with six parameters and no output schema. It does not explain the return format, pagination behavior, or filtering mechanics. Given the complexity, more detail is needed to allow correct invocation.

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 description must explain parameters. It mentions 'specified directory' (matching 'logsDir') and 'filtering options' but does not elaborate on 'limit', 'offset', 'logFilePrefix', 'logFileExtension', or 'maxDepth'. The description adds minimal meaning beyond the parameter names.

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 verb ('Get'), the resource ('available log files'), and key features ('paginated list', 'filtering options'). It distinguishes from sibling tools like 'search_logs' which implies searching content rather than listing files, and 'log_activity' which likely logs actions. However, it does not explicitly contrast with these 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?

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus siblings. There is no mention of prerequisites, directory existence requirements, or alternative tools for different use cases. The description is purely operational.

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