get_logs

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

The readOnlyHint annotation already marks it as read-only, and the description adds important context: logs are ephemeral and not persisted across restarts. This is valuable beyond the annotation, though it does not cover details like log rotation or memory limits.

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 three sentences long, front-loaded with the main purpose, then the usage context, then a caveat and alternative. Every sentence earns its place with no filler.

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 no required parameters and no output schema, the description covers purpose, when to use it, the ephemeral nature of logs, and directs users to the persistent alternative. This is fully sufficient for an agent to select and invoke the tool correctly.

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 low (only offset has a description, level has an enum, limit just has a default). The description repeats the level enum values but provides no additional meaning for limit or offset, leaving a gap in parameter understanding.

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 opens with 'Return recent in-memory server log entries,' which is a specific verb+resource construction. It also explicitly distinguishes itself from get_audit_logs, making its purpose unmistakable.

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 clearly states when to use the tool ('Use to diagnose unexpected tool behavior or connection errors during the current session') and explicitly names an alternative for persistent logs ('use get_audit_logs').

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