Search logs

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

There are no annotations, so the description carries the burden of explaining behavior. It adds useful context by calling the log stream 'synthetic, deterministic' and by indicating a non-mutating search operation. However, it does not mention ordering, pagination, or response shape, though an output schema exists.

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?

A single, well-structured sentence that front-loads the action and resource, states the search mechanism, and notes the optional filter. The parenthetical qualifier is meaningful rather than filler.

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?

For a tool with one required parameter and an output schema, the description provides enough context to invoke it correctly: service, substring query, and optional level. The only notable omission is an explicit explanation of 'limit', which is a minor gap given the schema's default value.

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 compensate. It effectively explains three parameters: service, query (the substring), and optional level filtering. However, the 'limit' parameter is not described at all, leaving its semantics to be inferred from the name and default value.

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 uses a specific verb ('Search') and names a concrete resource ('a service's log stream') with a clear scope (substring matching, optional level filtering). This clearly distinguishes it from sibling operations like get_service, check_service_health, or list_incidents.

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 when to use the tool—whenever you need to search a service's logs for a substring—but it gives no explicit when-not-to-use guidance or comparisons to alternative sibling tools. That is acceptable but leaves the routing decision partially to inference.

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