qradar_get_log_source

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

There are no annotations, so the description carries the burden. It discloses a read-oriented retrieval action ('Get') and clearly states the output behavior: 'Returns: JSON string containing log source properties (type, target collector, protocol, enabled status).' It does not cover error handling or auth, but for a simple by-ID getter this 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?

The description is compact and well structured: a one-sentence purpose, an Args line, and a Returns line. Every sentence adds useful information, and the key detail ('by ID') is front-loaded.

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 a single required integer parameter and an output schema, the description covers the resource, the argument, and the return payload sufficiently. It could additionally point to qradar_list_log_sources for finding IDs or mention failure behavior, but those are minor gaps rather than blockers.

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 compensates with an Args section explaining log_source_id as 'The ID of the log source.' Since this is the only required parameter and its purpose is fairly self-evident, the description provides enough added semantic meaning beyond the bare integer schema.

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 states a specific verb and resource: 'Get full configuration details of a specific log source by ID.' It clearly distinguishes the tool from list-oriented siblings like qradar_list_log_sources by emphasizing that it targets one log source by its ID.

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 phrase 'by ID' gives a clear context: use this tool when the caller already has a log_source_id and needs that source's full configuration. It does not explicitly name qradar_list_log_sources as the alternative for listing or discovering IDs, so it falls just short of the strongest routing guidance.

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