Get Dhcp Log

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

The readOnlyHint=true annotation already tells the agent this is a safe read. The description adds nothing further: no time range, no pagination behavior, no indication of log volume or freshness. With annotations covering the safety profile, the description contributes zero additional behavioral context.

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?

At five characters the description is maximally concise and front-loaded with the verb and resource. It is not padded or wasteful, though its brevity reflects under-specification rather than disciplined editing.

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?

An output schema exists, so the description need not explain return values, and there are no parameters to document. However, for a log-retrieval tool the description still omits any indication of what the log covers or how much history is returned, leaving it minimally adequate.

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 tool takes no parameters and the schema declares additionalProperties:false, so there is nothing for the description to disambiguate. Baseline 4 for a zero-parameter tool 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 '获取 DHCP 日志' is a literal restatement of the title 'Get Dhcp Log' and adds no information beyond the tool name. While the resource (DHCP log) is identifiable, the description itself does nothing to distinguish this tool from the many sibling log tools such as get_terminal_log or get_system_event_log.

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 guidance on when to use this tool versus the dozens of sibling log-retrieval tools (get_auth_log, get_arp_log, get_wan_pppoe_log, etc.). No conditions, no alternatives, no exclusions are stated.

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