Get logs

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It only says 'fetch runtime logs' but does not explain whether logs are historical, how many are returned, ordering, or any side effects. The existence of the 'lines' parameter is not mentioned.

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 sentence that gets directly to the point with no wasted words. However, it is so brief that it omits relevant context, but for conciseness alone it is 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?

The tool has no output schema, no annotations, and zero schema parameter descriptions, so the description must supply context. Apart from stating it fetches logs, there is no information about return format, default line count, or how to interpret the uuid. This is inadequate for an agent to use the tool confidently.

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%, and the description does not compensate by explaining that 'uuid' identifies the application or that 'lines' controls the number of log entries. No parameter semantics are added beyond what the schema structurally shows.

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 'Fetch runtime logs for an application' uses a specific verb and resource, clearly indicating the tool retrieves logs for an application. It distinguishes itself from sibling tools like getApplication and getDeployment, which fetch configuration/status rather than logs.

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?

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives. The description does not mention use cases (e.g., troubleshooting) or exclusions (e.g., use getDeployment for deployment logs).

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