get_ftp_logs

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full behavioral burden, yet it discloses nothing about what the logs contain, their format, retention window, volume, or whether the call is a safe read. Three words restating the name provide zero behavioral context.

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 maximally short and front-loaded with the verb and resource, with no filler. It is efficient but under-specifies rather than being genuinely concise, so it lands at the middle of the range.

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?

For a parameterless log-retrieval tool with no annotations and no output schema, the description should at least say what the logs cover or what a caller receives. It says nothing, so an agent cannot judge relevance or expected output.

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 tool takes zero parameters, so there is no parameter semantics to document and the schema is trivially complete. Baseline 4 applies since the description cannot add or detract from an empty 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?

States a clear verb+resource ('Get FTP logs'), so the operation is identifiable. However, it offers no differentiation from adjacent sibling tools such as get_ftp_base_info, list_ftp_users, or sync_ftp_users, leaving the agent to infer scope from the name alone.

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?

There is no when-to-use guidance, no mention of prerequisites, time ranges, or the sibling tools it complements. The agent gets no signal about when this is the right call versus get_ftp_base_info or get_host_ssh_logs-style alternatives.

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