filter_time_range

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. It explains the behavior of each mode in detail, indicating how the filter applies to events vs traces. However, it does not clarify whether the tool modifies the log in place or returns a new log, nor does it mention permissions or side effects. The transparency is good but not exhaustive.

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 concise, with a one-line summary followed by a bulleted list of modes. Every sentence provides essential information, and the structure makes it easy to scan. There is no fluff or repetition.

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 tool has an output schema, so return values do not need explanation. The description covers the key inputs and behaviors thoroughly, though it misses an explanation for the 'log_id' parameter. Given the moderate complexity and presence of an output schema, the description is largely complete but has a minor gap.

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?

The schema has 0% description coverage, so the description must add meaning. It explains start and end as ISO-8601 strings and describes each mode value in detail. However, it omits an explanation of the required 'log_id' parameter, relying on the schema's title alone. Overall, it adds significant value for most parameters.

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's purpose: 'Filter a log by a time window.' It specifies the required start and end parameters as ISO-8601 strings and explains each mode option. This distinguishes it from sibling filter tools like filter_variants or filter_attribute_values, which focus on different aspects.

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 enumerates the mode parameter options with clear definitions, guiding the agent on when to use each mode (e.g., 'events' default, traces wholly or partially within window). It provides implied context for usage based on the desired time window semantics, but does not explicitly state when not to use this tool or mention alternatives.

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