Deploy logs

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

The readOnlyHint annotation already covers the safety profile, and the description adds useful behavioral context by specifying which logs are included and that only the last lines are returned. However, it does not disclose any additional behavior such as ordering, availability of logs, or error conditions, so it stays at an adequate level given the annotation coverage.

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, front-loaded sentence with no extraneous words. It immediately communicates the resource and scope, then lists the log sources. Every word earns its place.

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 simple read-only tool with two well-documented parameters and no output schema, the description covers the essential aspects: what the tool returns (last log lines) and which logs are included. It lacks only usage guidance and return formatting details, but these are less critical given the low complexity and schema coverage.

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 100%, so the schema already documents both parameters (name and lines) with their meanings and defaults. The description adds no additional semantic detail beyond what the schema provides, so the baseline of 3 is appropriate.

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 states a specific verb-resource relationship: it retrieves the last lines of deploy logs. It further distinguishes itself from siblings like status or list by naming the three specific log sources (host, cloudflared, wrangler), so an agent can tell this is a log-reading tool rather than a status or listing tool.

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 explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus its siblings. It does not mention alternatives like status for deployment health or list for deployment names, nor does it describe prerequisites such as requiring an active deploy or prior deploy action. The agent is left to infer usage from context.

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