nzbget_log

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It only states the action 'Get log entries' without any details on permissions, rate limits, side effects, or response format, making it insufficient for a tool with parameters.

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 extremely concise with a single three-word phrase, 'Get log entries', which is front-loaded and has no wasted words. However, this brevity comes at the cost of under-specification.

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 the complexity of having two parameters, no annotations, and no output schema, the description is incomplete. It does not provide enough information for an agent to understand how to use the tool effectively or what to expect in return.

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 the description does not mention or explain the two parameters (idFrom and numberOfEntries). This leaves the parameters completely undocumented, failing to compensate for the lack of schema descriptions.

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 'Get log entries' restates the tool name 'nzbget_log' in a slightly different phrasing, making it tautological. It specifies the verb 'Get' and resource 'log entries', but lacks specificity about what kind of log entries or how they differ from other logging-related tools like 'nzbget_write_log'.

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 alternatives. There is no mention of context, prerequisites, or comparisons with sibling tools like 'nzbget_history' or 'nzbget_write_log', leaving the agent with no usage direction.

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