get_logs

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must carry the full burden of disclosing behavior. It only states a read operation ('Get') and the resource, but does not mention side effects, permissions, ordering guarantees, or whether it can block. The verb implies read-only, but crucial behavioral details are missing.

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 a single sentence that is front-loaded with the verb and resource. It includes a meaningful qualifier ('from the app') and the parameter reference without any fluff. Every word earns its place.

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 (one optional parameter) and an output schema exists, so return values are likely covered elsewhere. However, the description lacks usage guidance and behavioral transparency, making it incomplete for an agent that needs to understand when to invoke this tool and what to expect beyond the returned data.

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% because the only parameter 'n' lacks a description in the schema. The description says 'last n', which clarifies that n controls the number of records to return. This provides semantic meaning beyond the schema's type/default, but does not explain constraints like minimum/maximum values or behavior with zero.

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 'Get' and clearly identifies the resource: 'Python logging records from the app'. This distinguishes it from sibling tools like get_app_output or get_app_state, which target other data. The scope ('last n') adds precision.

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 does not provide any explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. There are no exclusions, prerequisites, or suggested contexts. The usage is only implied by the name and resource, falling short of even a clear contextual hint.

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