rca_admin_read_audit_log

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, and destructiveHint. The description adds that it returns a JSON list, which is useful but not critical. It does not disclose additional behavioral traits like rate limits or authentication details.

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, with a front-loaded purpose and a clear parameter list. It is efficient and avoids unnecessary details.

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?

Given the presence of an output schema, the description adequately explains input parameters and return format. However, it lacks details on pagination, multi-hour queries, or integration with sibling tools, making it insufficient for complex uses.

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 repeats the parameter meanings from the schema (token, hour_key) with the format for hour_key. However, it omits client_id from the schema. Since schema description coverage is 0% (likely meaning schema descriptions are insufficient), the description adds some value but not enough to fully compensate.

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 reads structured audit log entries for a given hour bucket, with a specific verb and resource. It is distinguishable from siblings like rca_admin_health (health) and rca_admin_purge_namespace (destructive). However, it does not explicitly differentiate from other read-oriented tools.

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 no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It does not mention exclusions or prerequisites. For example, it does not note that this is a safe, read-only operation compared to rca_admin_purge_namespace.

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