grafana_logs_link

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

Discloses that client/component matching is case-insensitive against service_name label, default range is 1 hour, and the return format. Since no annotations are provided, the description carries the burden well.

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?

Single paragraph front-loaded with purpose, but includes procedural details. Could be slightly more structured, but remains concise given the information density.

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?

Describes the return object with fields like query, explore_url, range, preview_count, preview, compensating for lack of output schema. Context with siblings is clear.

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?

Adds meaning beyond the schema: explains how client and component map to service_name, that from/to have defaults, and that line_filter matches substrings. Schema coverage is 100%, so baseline is 3, but description adds value.

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 builds a permanent Grafana Explore link for logs and returns a preview of recent lines. It identifies the customer/component using free text, distinguishing itself from sibling query 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?

Provides guidelines on pasting the URL into a ticket and warns about widening the range due to large logs. However, it does not explicitly contrast with sibling tools like grafana_query.

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