get_runtime_output

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, and destructiveHint. The description adds value by disclosing the 2-second post-termination delay and stating the return structure, which goes beyond annotations. No contradictions.

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?

Well-structured with Args and Returns sections. Information is front-loaded with the main purpose. No redundant sentences. Could be slightly more concise but overall efficient.

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 that an output schema exists, the description appropriately covers parameters and timing. For a read-only tool, it provides enough context for effective usage. The mention of full_log_path is a nice touch.

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 0%, but the description provides clear explanations for all three parameters: project_path (Xcode project/workspace path), regex_filter (optional regex pattern), and max_lines (default 20). This adds substantial meaning beyond the schema.

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?

Explicitly states it fetches runtime console output from the most recent run, distinguishing it from sibling tools like get_build_errors which focus on build logs. The verb 'fetches' and resource 'runtime console output' are specific.

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?

Provides a crucial timing constraint: output becomes available 2 seconds after app terminates. This helps the agent know when to call it. While it doesn't explicitly state when not to use, the context of sibling tools implies it's for runtime logs after execution.

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