get_audit_logs

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

No annotations provided, so description carries full burden. It describes the tool as returning entries from a persistent on-disk audit log, implying read-only and non-destructive behavior. While it doesn't explicitly state 'read-only' or 'no side effects,' the context strongly suggests it.

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?

Two concise sentences, each serving a clear purpose: first defines the tool, second provides usage guidance. No unnecessary words.

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 tool with one parameter and no output schema, the description covers core purpose and usage but fails to explain the only parameter. This is a noticeable gap, though the tool's purpose is well understood.

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 coverage is 0%, and the description does not discuss the 'limit' parameter. The schema provides name and default but no description. Description should explain how limit controls the number of entries returned or any other effect.

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?

Description clearly states the tool returns recent entries from the persistent on-disk audit log of write operations. It distinguishes itself from sibling get_logs by specifying it reviews mutations across sessions, while get_logs handles in-session debugging.

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?

Explicitly states when to use (review mutations across sessions) and when to prefer alternative (get_logs for in-session behavior). Provides clear context.

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