read_log

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

没有注解，描述需承担全部行为披露责任。描述仅提及读取和过滤，未说明是否只读取尾部、返回格式、错误处理、是否会因大文件阻塞等行为。tail参数存在但未在描述中解释，透明度不足。

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?

描述仅一句话，非常简洁，但牺牲了必要信息。虽然没有冗余内容，但信息量不足以支持正确使用，简洁性尚可但内容不足。

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?

5个参数（2个必需），无输出模式，无注解。描述未涵盖tail参数、返回行为、异常处理等，对于读取日志的工具来说信息严重不完整，仅提及过滤功能，整体不足。

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?

模式覆盖率为0%，描述需要补偿。描述提到日志级别和关键词过滤，对应level和keyword参数，但未解释mc_dir、instance_id和tail参数的含义。虽然提供了部分参数语义，但远不充分。

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?

描述明确说明工具读取Minecraft实例的latest.log，并支持按日志级别和关键词过滤，动词和资源明确。虽然没有明确提及尾部读取，但与兄弟工具（如find_crash_reports、analyze_crash）有区分，目的清晰。

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?

描述没有说明何时使用此工具而非其他工具，也没有提及替代品或使用场景。只有基本的读取和过滤说明，没有提供使用指导。

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