logcenter_logs

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

Annotations already carry readOnlyHint, destructiveHint, and openWorldHint, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds the meaningful ordering behavior (newest first), which is not in the annotations or schema, but says nothing about pagination semantics, volume limits, or that openWorld means log content is untrusted/user-influenced data.

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?

Four short fragments, front-loaded with the resource and ordering. Terse and scannable, though the category clauses are compressed to the point of near-telegraphic style.

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 has an output schema, so return values need not be explained, and annotations cover safety. However, with seven parameters, two enums, and zero required fields, the description should at least clarify default behavior (system log, level any, 50 entries) and how since/until interact with offset for paging. Category definitions alone leave invocation details thin.

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 only 43%, so since/until and keyword have help text but log, level, limit, and offset do not. The description compensates by enumerating the values of the log parameter and describing what each category contains (hardware, sign-ins, SMB paths), which is genuine added meaning beyond the bare enum. level, limit, and offset remain undocumented.

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 the resource (DSM Log Center) and the ordering (newest first), and the three log categories clearly enumerate what can be retrieved. It does not name an alternative log tool, but among the siblings the only close one is cloudsync_logs, whose distinction (cloud sync vs. DSM system logs) is implicit rather than stated.

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?

No when-to-use or when-not-to-use guidance is given. The description does not say how this differs from cloudsync_logs, dsm_notifications, or taskscheduler_runs, so an agent must infer routing from category names alone.

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