get_app_output

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

No annotations are present, so the description carries the transparency burden. It discloses a key limitation (only for launch_app apps) and implies a read-only 'get' operation, but it does not describe behavior when no app is running, whether it blocks, or the role of the port parameter.

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 exceptionally concise: two sentences, front-loaded with the core action and a useful constraint. Every word adds value, with no redundancy.

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 is simple and has an output schema, so return values are covered. However, the port parameter is unexplained, and edge cases like a non-running app are not mentioned. The description covers the main purpose but leaves significant context gaps.

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 description explains 'n' as the number of lines, but leaves 'port' completely undocumented. With schema description coverage at 0%, the description fails to explain a parameter, offering only partial compensation.

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 retrieves the last n lines of the launched app's stdout/stderr, with a specific verb ('Get') and resource. It distinguishes itself from sibling log tools like get_logs by specifying app output rather than general logs.

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 a clear precondition: only works for apps started via launch_app. This gives context on when the tool is applicable, though it does not explicitly compare with alternatives such as get_logs or state when not to use it.

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