ddev_logs

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. It discloses that the tool displays stdout logs via docker logs and implies streaming behavior through the --follow flag. However, it doesn't mention potential long-running behavior with -f or any prerequisites like a running project, leaving some behavioral gaps.

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 and well-structured: a clear purpose first, followed by usage and flags, all in three short sentences. Every line adds value, and the pointer to 'ddev help logs' avoids unnecessary detail.

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 simple logs tool with all optional parameters and no output schema, the description covers the essential behavior, defaults, and flags. It doesn't describe return values, but that's expected for logs. The only minor omission is explicit explanation of the projectPath parameter, though it's implied in the usage line.

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 100%, so the baseline is 3. The description adds meaningful context by explaining the default service and giving a concrete example for the service parameter, plus mapping CLI flags to parameters. It also hints at projectPath through the '[projectname]' positional argument.

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 function: 'Display stdout logs from DDEV services (docker logs).' It uses a specific verb and resource, and the focus on logs distinguishes it from sibling commands like ddev_export_db or ddev_exec.

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 provides concrete usage context, including the default service ('Default: web service') and an example for selecting a different service ('use service for e.g. db'). It also lists common flags, making it easy to understand when to use this tool, though it doesn't explicitly exclude alternatives.

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