get_logs_archive_order

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

No annotations are provided, and the description only mentions the returned data (ordered list of IDs) without disclosing behavioral traits such as whether the order is ascending/descending, any caching, permission requirements, or side effects. The lack of detail leaves the agent with incomplete understanding of the tool's behavior.

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, concise sentence that directly states the tool's purpose without any redundant or irrelevant information.

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 description explains the return value (ordered list of IDs) but lacks details on the format, order criteria, or any potential limitations. With no output schema, more context would be helpful for the agent to interpret results correctly.

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?

There are no parameters, so schema coverage is 100%, putting baseline at 3. The description adds no parameter-specific meaning beyond stating the output, which is acceptable given the zero-parameter signature.

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 action ('Get') and the resource ('ordered list of log archive IDs') and specifies the context ('showing the priority order'). It effectively distinguishes from the sibling 'get-logs-archives' which likely retrieves archive metadata rather than order.

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 implies the tool is for retrieving the priority order of archives but does not explicitly state when to use it over alternatives (e.g., get-logs-archives) or any prerequisites/conditions.

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