server_logs

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

With no annotations, the description carries full burden. It only says 'return' logs, not whether this is safe/read-only, whether auth is needed, or how recent is defined. No caveats or side effects are disclosed, making it insufficiently transparent.

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 extremely concise: two sentences, purpose first, then parameter explanation. No wasted words, and the structure is front-loaded with the primary function.

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 one-parameter tool with an output schema, the description is adequate but not fully complete. It lacks usage guidance and behavioral transparency (e.g., whether the server must be running, what 'recent' means, output format beyond schema). It's a minimal viable description, not a rich one.

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 has zero description coverage, but the description adds 'Number of trailing log lines to return,' giving meaning to the 'lines' parameter. This directly compensates for the schema gap, though it's the only parameter and the added detail is minimal.

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 clearly states 'Return recent server log output,' using a specific verb and resource. It distinguishes from sibling tools like server_start, server_stop, server_status, which are about control/status, not logs.

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?

Usage is implied: use this tool to fetch server logs. However, there's no explicit 'when to use' or mention of alternatives. No exclusions or conditions are stated, so it's not fully transparent.

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