Get Console

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

The annotations provide readOnlyHint=true, so the read-only nature is covered. The description adds useful behavioral details: keyword is a case-insensitive substring filter, count_only returns N matches as a string, and since filters by last N seconds. These go beyond the schema, providing clarity on how the tool behaves.

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?

Three concise sentences, front-loaded with the core purpose. Every sentence earns its place: purpose, exclusion, and parameter semantics. No filler or redundancy.

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 description is sufficient given the tool's complexity: 6 parameters, no output schema, and readOnlyHint annotation. It covers all filter options and the alternative tool. It doesn't describe the return format for non-count_only calls, but that is a minor gap given the intuitive nature of console logs.

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 schema covers count, first, and level with descriptions, but the description adds meaning for keyword, count_only, and since—parameters that lack schema descriptions. This fills the gap and achieves comprehensive parameter understanding, though not all parameter semantics are described in the description itself.

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 the tool returns 'Recent console logs' and explicitly distinguishes it from get_compile_errors for C# compile errors. This gives a specific verb+resource (retrieves console logs) and clear differentiation from a sibling.

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?

It directly tells the agent when to use this tool (for recent console logs) and when not to ('For C# compile errors use get_compile_errors instead'). This is explicit and actionable.

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