List Org Debug Logs

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds that results include a match count, but says nothing about pagination behavior, default page size, or how the cursor interacts with the 200 cap — gaps that matter for an 11-parameter listing 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 short sentences with zero filler; the enumeration purpose comes first and the follow-up download step second, matching the natural call order.

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?

With 11 optional filter parameters and no output schema, the description covers the core intent and the downstream handoff but omits what the returned entries look like, how the count is expressed, and any pagination semantics an agent needs to page correctly.

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 82%, so the schema already documents nearly every parameter including enums and time formats. The description adds no filtering syntax, default, or interaction guidance beyond the schema, which is the expected baseline when coverage is this high.

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?

States a specific verb and resource ("List the debug logs stored in a Salesforce org") plus an output trait ("with how many match"), and explicitly names the sibling apexlog_get_org_logs as the download step, so the agent can distinguish the two without opening either schema.

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?

Gives a clear workflow cue: use this to enumerate and then pass ids to apexlog_get_org_logs to download. It does not, however, mention when to prefer the other list/search siblings (apexlog_list_slow_operations, apexlog_list_limit_risks, apexlog_search_events), leaving that routing to inference.

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