describe_log

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

No annotations provided, so description carries full burden. It discloses potential failure (HandleNotFound if log evicted), caching behavior (1-hour TTL or LRU), and re-computation on demand. Lacks auth or side-effect details, but adequate for a read-only tool.

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 sentences, front-loaded with purpose, second sentence adds behavioral detail. No redundant information; each sentence earns its place.

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 one parameter, no nested objects, and presence of output schema, the description covers purpose, failure mode, and data retention. It could mention prerequisite call to load_event_log, but 'previously loaded log' implies that.

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 description must compensate. It indicates log_id refers to a previously loaded log, adding context beyond the bare schema. However, it doesn't specify format or constraints on the ID.

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 tool returns a compact summary for a previously loaded log. It specifies the output is the same shape as the summary in load_event_log's response, distinguishing it from loading and other abstract 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?

The description implies the tool should be used after loading a log, but does not explicitly state when not to use it or list alternative tools. The context of siblings suggests alternatives for different abstractions, but no direct comparison.

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