ews_get_audit_log

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

No annotations are provided, so the description bears full responsibility. It reveals read-only behavior and explicitly states no external calls or credential reading. It does not cover limit behavior or return format, but given the simplicity, it is adequate.

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?

Two succinct sentences with no redundant information. The first sentence front-loads the purpose, and the second clarifies a key behavioral aspect.

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 three parameters and no output schema, the description covers purpose and read-only nature but omits expected return format or pagination behavior. It is adequate but incomplete for a fully self-contained description.

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 67% (two of three parameters have descriptions). The description does not add meaning beyond the schema; it only restates the action and status filters without extra detail. The 'limit' parameter is left undocumented in schema and description, so baseline 3 is appropriate.

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 'Read' and the resource 'recent local lifecycle audit entries for meeting preview, confirmed, duplicate, in-progress, and error actions.' It also distinguishes from other tools by noting it does not read EWS credentials or call Exchange.

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 provides clear context for usage (reading local audit entries) and hints that it is not for Exchange operations. However, it does not explicitly state when to use it vs. alternatives 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.