Show JavaScript deployment logs

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and destructiveHint=false, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds minimal behavioral context (debugging purpose) but does not describe pagination behavior, output format, or any rate limits. With annotations present, this meets the baseline but adds little beyond them.

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 a single, direct sentence that immediately states the action and purpose. There is no redundant wording or fluff; every part contributes to understanding the tool's 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 read-only log retrieval tool with no output schema, the description covers the core use case adequately. However, it doesn't mention how to obtain the buildUuid (e.g., from a listing tool) or that fromLine is for pagination, which are practical details an agent would benefit from. Given the schema covers parameters and annotations cover safety, this is average completeness.

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 100% — all three parameters (domain, buildUuid, fromLine) have individual descriptions. The tool description does not add any additional parameter context beyond what the schema already provides, so the baseline of 3 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 states a specific action ('Retrieve logs') and a specific resource ('specified JavaScript application deployment'), and includes a clear purpose ('for debugging purposes in case of failure'). It distinguishes from similar log tools like hosting_getNodeJSBuildLogsV1 by explicitly targeting JavaScript deployment logs, though it could be even more explicit about the distinction.

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?

The description implies when to use the tool (when debugging a failed JavaScript deployment) but does not explicitly name alternative tools or specify when not to use it. It also doesn't mention that the buildUuid typically comes from a prior listing operation (e.g., hosting_listJsDeployments), leaving that context implicit.

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